Correspondence

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the average time taken was by his Department to reply to correspondence from hon. Members and Peers in the last 12 months; and for what proportion of letters the time taken to send a response was longer than (a) one month, (b) six weeks, (c) two months, (d) three months and (e) six months in that period.

Norman Baker: The average time taken by the Department for Transport to respond to 12,404 items of correspondence received from hon. Members and Peers in the 12 months since the 30 August 2011 was 19.6 working days.
	The proportions of responses taking longer than one month are as follows:
	(a) longer than one month—31% of responses
	(b) longer than six weeks—12.5% of responses
	(c) longer than two months—8.5% of responses.
	(d) longer than three months—3% of responses
	(e) longer than six months—0.4% of responses.
	The Cabinet Office, on an annual basis, publishes a report to Parliament on the performance of Departments in replying to Members' and Peers' correspondence. The report for 2011 was published on 15 March 2012, Official Report, columns 31-33WS.

Burma

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with Burmese officials during his recent visit to Rangoon on the Muslim Rohingya.

Hugo Swire: On 16 January 2012, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), issued a written ministerial statement to update the House regarding his visit to Burma on 5-6 January,Official  Report, columns 27-28WS.
	During the visit the Secretary of State raised with the Foreign Minister the discrimination suffered by the Rohingya community, who have been denied citizenship and access to basic services and rights.
	The Secretary of State also met a range of representatives from ethnic communities, including the Kachin, Rohingya, Shan, Rakhine, Chin, Mon, Karen and Karenni to hear more about their concerns and aspirations.

Burma

Jeremy Lefroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to urge the government of Burma to recognise the citizenship of Rohingya people whose families have lived in Burma for generations.

Hugo Swire: For many years the British Government has been a strong supporter of those in Burma pursuing democracy and respect for human rights. We have consistently called for discrimination against the Rohingya to end and for their rights to be recognised.
	The United Kingdom has long been one of the most active and vocal members of the international community in raising these concerns with the Burmese authorities. We have also continued to raise the issue in international institutions such as the UN Human Rights Council where, in March of this year, we strongly supported a resolution which made clear to the Burmese Government the urgent need to resolve the issue of nationality for the Rohingya community.

Burma

Jeremy Lefroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to urge the Government of Burma to allow unhindered access for the UN and international humanitarian aid agencies and human rights organisations to all areas of Arakan State to assess the situation and monitor the distribution of humanitarian aid on the basis of need and without discrimination.

Hugo Swire: Through both our bilateral relations and through international forums, such as the United Nations, have called repeatedly for the Burmese Government to take measures to put an end to the recent inter-communal violence in Rakhine (Arakan) State and to allow unhindered humanitarian access to the areas affected.
	The UK has long provided humanitarian assistance to Rohingya communities in both Burma's Rakhine State and Bangladesh through core support to the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department and United Nations agencies, as well as to all communities across Rakhine State through our major investments in health, education and livelihoods.

Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council

Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the potential effects on community organisations of the reduction in funding for the Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council.

Hugo Swire: I welcome the Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council's (CYEC) work in providing Commonwealth focussed advice, training, and educational materials to young people and youth organisations, as well as organising exchanges between youth groups in the UK. and in other Commonwealth countries.
	The British Council have had to review their relationships with partners, including the CYEC. In the last two years, they have been in dialogue with CYEC about making their relationship more strategic and sustainable. CYEC continues to be a valued partner for the British Council, and there remain opportunities for CYEC to work with the British Council in the future.
	The British Council are fully committed to working with partners to develop and secure educational and other opportunities for young people, including in the Commonwealth, and this is at the heart of the British Council's strategy for their work in education and society.

Democratic Republic of Congo

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to monitor the human rights and safety of failed asylum seekers returning to the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Hugo Swire: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office continues to monitor the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). We are aware of reports of allegations that failed asylum seekers from the DRC have been subject to mistreatment on return, but the FCO and the Home office have found no reliable evidence to substantiate these allegations. Should the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or UKBA receive any specific allegations that a returnee has experienced harm or ill-treatment after being returned to the DRC from the UK, these allegations would be investigated in partnership with UKBA.

Diplomatic Service

Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment his Department has made of the effect of the introduction of its Diplomatic Excellence Programme.

David Lidington: Our framework for measuring diplomatic excellence combines both internal and external assessment to reach a score which is reported annually. Our approach has been validated by the Office for National Statistics and endorsed by the Cabinet Office.
	Our benchmark score for 2011-12 has been assessed externally as 6.8/10 and the panel perceived we were second to France on the 'best Diplomatic service in the world' ranking. Our aim is to achieve at least 7/10 by end FY 2012-13 and to be the best diplomatic service in the world by 2015.

European Economic and Social Committee

Therese Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how UK members of the Economic and Social Committee are nominated for appointment.

David Lidington: The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) includes representatives from across society from three distinct groups. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills are responsible for Group 1 (employees) and Group 2 (employers) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is responsible for UK nominations to Group 3 (other interests).
	The nomination process in the FCO invites applicants to, submit written bids for a position. The FCO assesses these bids against the following criteria:
	(1) Relevant knowledge and experience;
	(2) Ability to contribute effectively to the work of the EESC;
	(3) Ability to be effectively representative as a member of the UK Delegation (for both the UK and respective sector);
	(4) Current or recent engagement in their field.
	The FCO then identifies the most suitable candidate for nomination on that basis. The decision is then put forward for ministerial approval.

India

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has made representations to his Indian counterpart on the abolition of the death penalty; and what discussions he has had with his Commonwealth counterparts on the death penalty in India.

Hugo Swire: It is the longstanding policy of successive British Governments to oppose the death penalty, in all circumstances, as a matter of principle. We regularly make our position clear to the Government of India, both bilaterally and through the European Union, and urge them to introduce a formal moratorium.
	In 2011, the then Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth, the hon. Member for Taunton Deane (Mr Browne), raised the death penalty with the then Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao in June and with Minister of State for External Affairs Preneet Kaur in July. Mr Browne wrote to the Indian High Commissioner twice, most recently in November 2011. This year, he raised the Government's concerns regarding the case of Balwant Singh Rajoana when he met the Indian High Commissioner on 28 March. In addition, at the UN Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review of India, we urged India to maintain its de facto moratorium on the death penalty.
	We have not discussed the issue of the death penalty in India with Commonwealth partners. However, we have regularly raised the issue of the death penalty in Commonwealth institutions, most recently when the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), raised the issue at the Commonwealth People's Forum at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth in October 2011.

India

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department is taking to increase exports to India.

Hugo Swire: Increasing UK exports to India is a priority for both the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and UK Trade and Industry (UKTI). Both Prime Ministers agreed in 2010 to double bilateral trade within five years. Ministers take every opportunity to engage with their Indian counterparts both in support of UK firms and to lobby on wider issues of market access. Ministers hosted senior Indian CEOs following the Global Investment Conference in London in July and both the FCO and UKTI support the UK/India CEO Forum which will report with recommendations directly to the two Prime Ministers.
	We are allocating greater resources to India, opening new missions in the most dynamic states to make the most of the opportunities on offer and, in collaboration with UKTI, providing direct assistance to companies seeking to operate there. We support the negotiation of an ambitious Free Trade Agreement between the EU and India which will further reduce barriers to trade. Bilateral investment is also strong, with India investing more in the UK than in the rest of Europe combined.

Mexico

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with reference to his Department's Torture and Mistreatment Reporting Guidance, whether he has received reports on allegations of torture from his staff in Mexico.

Hugo Swire: It would not be appropriate to provide information about specific reports received from Foreign and Commonwealth Office staff under the Torture and Mistreatment Reporting Guidance.
	Human rights forms an important part of our work in Mexico, and our embassy in Mexico City is paying close attention to the question of torture. Our embassy is in regular contact with a number of non-governmental organisations including Peace Brigades International, Human Rights Watch, The Mexican Commission for the Defence and Protection of Human Rights, and the Mexico City Human Rights Commission, from which it receives reports and updates on human rights cases.

Middle East

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has had discussions with his counterparts in the Israeli government on permitting Palestinians living in Jerusalem to vote in Palestinian elections.

Alistair Burt: We welcome the news that there are to be local elections held in the West Bank on 20 October.
	This Government looks to all parties to facilitate elections in the areas under their control and to help ensure a free and fair electoral process. We have not recently raised the specific issue of voting rights of Palestinians living in Jerusalem with the Government of Israel. Local Palestinian elections are not held in East Jerusalem, as they are seen as too contentious and a final status issue.

Middle East

Jonathan Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to continue the UK's support for human rights non-governmental organisations in the Middle East.

Alistair Burt: Support for human rights non-governmental organisations (NGOs) is a vital element of our effort to promote and protect universal human rights in the Middle East. We provide support through a variety of funding sources, including the Human Rights and Democracy Programme Fund, the Conflict Pool and country programmes led by the Department for International Development. Our £110 million Arab Partnership Fund, launched last year, has also increased our investment in supporting the people of the region to build more open and accountable societies, with greater respect for the rule of law and human rights.
	Examples of our support include funding for B'Tselem, an Israeli NGO that uses deterrence, accountability and public awareness to improve human rights in the West Bank and the Gaza strip. In Jordan we work with the Adaleh Center to combat torture and to improve the application of international fair trial standards. In Syria, we are providing urgent training and equipment to human rights activists, including cameras, video recorders and forensic equipment. Britain has already trained more than 60 Syrian human rights activists to collect information to support criminal investigations. We are also working with Saferworld, a UK NGO, to promote women's political participation within the broader context of promoting gender equality and women's empowerment in Egypt, Libya and Yemen.
	The UK places great value on the important role played by human rights NGOs and as well as providing support, we seek to regularly consult them. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague's), Human Rights Advisory Group includes the heads of several UK based human rights NGOs as well as human rights legal practitioners and convenes every six months.

South Sudan

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent reports he has received on the progress of a pipeline between South Sudan and Kenya.

Mark Simmonds: A memorandum of understanding was signed between the Governments of South Sudan and Kenya on 2 March on developing a transport corridor between South Sudan and the Kenyan port of Lamu. including a possible oil pipeline. We have received no recent updates on this proposal.

Sudan

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent reports he has received on the status of the appeals to release the lawyers, Mohammed Abdullah Al Duma, Gibril Hamid Hassabu, Rehab Assidiq Sharif and Rashida Al Ansari in Darfur.

Mark Simmonds: Sudanese security forces arrested the four lawyers, who are members of the Darfur Bar Association, on 1 July 2012. This occurred after they attended a press conference held for the human rights activist Dr. Bushra Gamar. Officials at the British embassy in Khartoum raised these cases with the Government of Sudan, in addition to the cases of other detained persons and the need to respect freedom of expression and human rights. The four lawyers were released after four days in detention.

Acid Attacks

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development whether she has had recent discussions with her international counterparts on the monitoring and prevention of acid attacks.

Alan Duncan: On a visit to Pakistan in March 2012, the Secretary of State publically reiterated the UK Government's commitment to ending acid violence and to working to empower and protect women and girls in Pakistan and other countries where this kind of violence exists.
	DFID currently funds Acid Survivors Trust International (ASTI), a UK-based specialist international non-governmental organisation that has been tackling acid violence in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Uganda, Nepal and Cambodia for almost 10 years. This funding includes support for monitoring and prevention of acid attacks. The former Parliamentary Under-Secretary for State, the hon. Stephen O'Brien and I, both underlined UK support for ASTI's work when we visited Acid Survivors Foundation Bangladesh in 2011.

Burma

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps her Department plans to take to ensure that humanitarian assistance is provided to refugees and internally displaced peoples along the Bangladesh-Burma border.

Alan Duncan: The UK Government has repeatedly called for the Government of Burma to allow unhindered humanitarian access to all of the areas affected. Humanitarian agencies, including those receiving core funding from the United Kingdom, are now able to provide aid to some of the affected areas, in line with the humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence - but this falls short of what is needed. In August the then Secretary of State for International Development, the right hon. Andrew Mitchell met with the Prime Minister of Bangladesh and raised directly with her our concerns about the level of access being allowed to humanitarian non-governmental organisations supporting Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. We continue to monitor the situation and humanitarian response on both sides of the border closely.

Democratic Republic of Congo

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what support her Department is providing to refugees internally displaced in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Alan Duncan: Conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has displaced approximately 500,000 people since the start of the year. 2012 has seen a significant deterioration in DRC’s humanitarian situation, with large numbers of people forced to flee their homes and livelihoods, brutal attacks on civilians by a number of armed groups, and serious cholera and measles epidemics among displaced populations.
	The UK has been providing significant support to those who have had to leave their homes as a result of violence, ensuring that displaced people have access to safe water, shelter, healthcare and protection from further attacks. Our support reaches 2.1 million people in DRC each year with emergency assistance. The UK is the largest donor to the Rapid Response to the Movement of Populations mechanism which—by the end of July—had reached more than 368,000 newly displaced people with emergency assistance.
	We remain extremely concerned by the situation facing the population of eastern Congo, and are working closely with United Nations and non-governmental organisations to ensure vulnerable people are reached quickly and effectively with essential lifesaving assistance.

Overseas Aid

Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many of her Department's funded projects started in the last five years (a) have been delivered later than originally scheduled and (b) are estimated to be delivered later than originally scheduled.

Alan Duncan: Information on projects delivered, or estimated to be delivered, late than originally scheduled is available for individual projects. However, this information is not recorded in the Department's management information system and could only be collected at disproportionate cost. I have asked officials to advise how this might be done in future.

Remittances

John Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will estimate the average cost of using a money transfer company to send a remittance payment.

Alan Duncan: The Department of International Development relies on the World Bank for data on international remittance costs. The World Bank coordinates international action to meet the commitment made by G8 countries in 2009 to reduce the average cost of sending and receiving remittances by 5 percentage points to 5.0% by 2014. International remittance costs are monitored by the World Bank through the Remittance Prices Worldwide database http://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/.
	The database is updated every six months. Latest available data for the period January-March 2012 showed that the average total cost of sending remittances from the UK was 7.93%, compared to a global average of 9.12%.

Remittances

John Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what estimate she has made of how much money was sent abroad in remittance payments in each month in (a) 2011 and (b) the first half of 2012.

Alan Duncan: The Department for International Development relies on the Office for National Statistics (ONS) for data on UK transfers. The ONS does not publish separate estimates for remittances as they are not considered to be of sufficient quality. Instead, estimates for remittances are combined with estimates for net transfers from UK charities, defined in the UK Balance of Payments (the Pink Book) as ‘other payments by households’.
	Data for ‘other payments by households’ is only available on an annual basis. The 2012 Edition of the Pink Book published in July estimated ‘other payments by households’ at £5.74 billion in 2011
	http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bop/united-kingdom-balance-of-payments/2012/index.html

Broadband: Hartlepool

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport if she will bring forward proposals to improve broadband (a) connectivity and (b) speed for Elwick village in Hartlepool constituency; and if she will make a statement.

Edward Vaizey: The Government has made available £530 million in the current spending round to stimulate private investment in superfast broadband in locations where the commercial investment case is weak. Hartlepool is covered by the Durham local broadband plan. The plan has been approved by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and the project has been allocated £9.88 million. Durham county council is the lead authority and is currently preparing to run a procurement exercise to appoint a supplier to upgrade the communications infrastructure in areas eligible for public support. The hon. Member may, therefore, wish to contact the county council about the coverage areas included in their local broadband plan.

Digital Broadcasting: Radio

Gordon Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what steps she is taking to improve coverage of digital radio in (a) England, (b) the South East and (c) Sittingbourne and Sheppey constituency.

Edward Vaizey: Ofcom are leading a review of future DAB coverage, as part of the joint Government industry Digital Radio Action Plan. Earlier this year, Ofcom published a consultation setting out the parameters for future DAB coverage planning and how infrastructure needs to change to match current FM level. The consultation can be found at:
	http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/radio/coverage/dab-coverage/?utm_source=updates8tutm_medium =email&utm_campaign=dab-coverage-report
	In June 2012 Government, multiplex operators and the BBC signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on local DAB funding for radio switchover. The MOU set out the process for up to £21 million on investment in local DAB infrastructure over the next five years. In addition, the MOU will facilitate the launching of five new local multiplexes, including across North East Wales.

London Airports

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what recent estimate she has made of the percentage of passengers arriving at (a) Heathrow and (b) Gatwick airport who go on to visit parts of mainland UK other than Greater London; and if she will make a statement.

Hugh Robertson: The Department has made no recent estimate. Data relating to travel behaviour of inbound visitors is collated by the Office for National Statistics, via the International Passenger Survey (IPS). The IPS records how many overseas visitors went to different parts of the UK during their visit, at the following link; however this information is not airport specific:
	http://www.visitbritain.org/insightsandstatistics/inboundvisitorstatistics/regions/index.aspx
	In 2011, the IPS estimates that 50.4% of total visits to the UK took place outside of London.

Public Sector: Telephone Services

Stephen McPartland: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport if she will discuss with Ofcom steps to protect low income consumers from high charges for calls to public sector helplines using 08 telephone numbers.

Edward Vaizey: This is an operational issue for the independent regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom).
	Ofcom's General Condition 14 requires communications providers to adopt Codes of Practice relating to their domestic and small business customers in relation to (i) information about pricing and services and (ii) display of prices for non-geographic and premium rate numbers.
	In terms of 0800 numbers, Ofcom's numbering plan requires that communications providers route calls to a pre-call announcement stating that the call is chargeable.
	In 2007 03 numbers were introduced as a lower cost alternative to chargeable 08 numbers like 0870. Calls to 03 numbers cost the same as calls to geographic numbers (starting 01 or 02), and are included as part of any inclusive call minutes or discount schemes in the same way as geographic calls. Revenue sharing—where the dialled party can receive a share of what the consumer pays to make a call—is not permitted on calls to 03 numbers.

Telephone Services: Fees and Charges

Julian Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what steps she is taking to ensure that (a) service charges and (b) access charges for non-geographic telephone numbers are advertised to consumers by telecommunications operators.

Edward Vaizey: This is an operational issue for the independent regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom). Currently, under General Condition 14, Ofcom requires communications providers to publish transparent pricing information for non-geographic calls, including in their advertising and promotional material. Providers must also ensure that those charges are given the same prominence as other call charge information.
	However, Ofcom recognises that the current system around non-geographic numbers does not work for consumers, with confusion around call pricing and concerns about revenue sharing. Therefore it is proposing to simplify the number ranges. The main proposals are:
	Freephone: (080 and 116 numbers) to be free from all telephones, landline and mobile;
	Revenue sharing ranges: (084, 087, 09 and 118 numbers—where a portion of the retail charge is passed back to the receiver of the call) are to have a common simplified structure.
	Under the new proposals, calls subject to revenue sharing will be “unbundled” so that consumers will know exactly how much is paid to their phone provider (the access charge) and how much is passed on to other companies (the service charge).
	Given the complexity of the changes there will need to be at least 18 months transition time, which will start when tire proposals are finalised by the end of this year.

Immigrants: Tuberculosis

Virendra Sharma: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information on migrants from high tuberculosis (TB) burden countries that have had pre-entry screening for active TB and who have arrived in the UK is exchanged between her Department and the Department of Health to assist with latent TB screening.

Mark Harper: The UK Border Agency and Health Protection Agency (HPA) are in the process of replacing the existing on-entry tuberculosis (TB) screening arrangements for arriving passengers with a new system of pre-migration screening for long term visa applicants in high incidence countries, and, as part of this work, are developing plans to expand information sharing to assist with latent TB screening in the community. This will include data on persons subject to pre-migration screening. The HPA and other health bodies already collect the name and address of migrants arriving at major UK airports from high incidence TB countries intending to stay for over six months to assist local healthcare teams to connect with new migrants. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends that healthcare providers use this data in considering whether to screen for latent TB. Those screened abroad are issued a certificate that advises the migrant to carry their x-rays and medical records from such screening and to pass these on to their GP in the UK.

Immigration

Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigrants applying for indefinite leave to remain in the UK have (a) been removed, (b) cases pending and (c) been allowed to remain in the UK following evidence that they have lied or used forged documents in their applications in the last 10 years.

Mark Harper: The data requested is not held in a format compatible with National Statistics protocols, or produced as part of the UK Border Agency's standard reports.
	The Home Office publishes immigration statistics annually and quarterly, which are available from the Home Office Research and Statistics website. This includes information on applications for further leave to remain as well as removals data. The latest statistics can be found in the Library of the House as well as on the following website:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-q2-2012/

Immigration Controls: Armed Forces

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps her Department is taking to enable foreign-born armed forces service personnel who wish to remain in the UK following discharge from the armed forces to apply for (a) leave to remain, (b) acquisition of settlement and (c) citizenship; and if she will make a statement.

Mark Harper: All foreign and Commonwealth personnel who leave HM forces are given 28 days leave to remain in the UK to allow them to arrange for their departure from the UK, or to apply for leave to remain under the immigration rules.
	Foreign and Commonwealth personnel who have served a minimum of four years in HM Forces and who have been, or are being discharged, are able to apply for and acquire settlement in the UK.
	Commonwealth personnel who have already acquired settlement under the immigration rules, or those who have served in HM forces for a minimum of five years, are able to apply for naturalisation as a British
	citizen.
	I do not propose to make a written or oral statement to the House on these matters.

Members: Correspondence

Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she intends to answer the letter concerning Ms A A sent to her by the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 31 July 2012.

Mark Harper: My right hon. Friend the former Minister for Immigration (Damian Green) wrote to the Rt. hon. Member on 4 September 2012.

Members: Correspondence

Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she intends to answer the letter concerning Ms N A sent to her by the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 31 July 2012.

Mark Harper: My right hon. Friend the former Minister for Immigration (Damian Green) wrote to the Rt. hon. Member on 30 August 2012.

Passports

Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress the Identity and Passport Service has made in reviewing gender markers in passports; and when she plans to publish the outcome of this review.

Mark Harper: The "Advancing transgender equality: a plan for action" published by the Home Office in December 2011, indicated that a review would be undertaken on how gender identification is represented in passport application forms and passports.
	The review is being carried out by the Identity and Passport Service and will meet the timeline, set out in the action plan, to report by the end of February 2013. The outcome of the review will form part of the Government's response in reporting progress on the transgender equality plan.

Road Traffic Control

Julian Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) traffic wardens, (b) police officers, (c) police community support officers and (d) civilian police staff performed traffic policing as their main function in England and Wales in each of the last 10 years.

Damian Green: Information for the last ten years on the number of traffic wardens, police officers, police community support officers and civilian staff (including s.38 designated officers) within the traffic and traffic wardens policing
	functions in England and Wales are shown in the following table.
	
		
			 Number of traffic wardens, police officers, police community support officers and civilian police staff within the traffic and the traffic warden policing functions in England and Wales, 2002-03 to 2011-12 (1, 2) 
			  Traffic (3) Traffic Wardens (4) 
			  Traffic Wardens (5) Police Officers Police Community Support Officers Civilian Police Staff (6) Traffic Wardens (5) Pol i ce Officers Police Community Support Officers Civilian Police Staff (6) 
			 2002-03 0 6,902 0 549 2,002 1 0 66 
			 2003-04 7 6,702 0 686 1,626 1 0 14 
			 2004-05 6 6,943 426 776 1,184 0 1 93 
			 2005-06 16 6,592 0 862 1,014 2 76 22 
			 2006-07 12 6,412 21 854 703 2 105 26 
			 2007-08 1 6,299 20 953 572 6 139 20 
			 2008-09 0 5,714 20 950 456 1 141 11 
			 2009-10 0 5,634 24 1,029 399 1 19 8 
			 2010-11 0 5,316 18 898 246 1 0 7 
			 2011-12 1 4,868 63 823 35 4 0 59 
			 (1) Staff with multiple responsibilities (or designations) are recorded under their primary role or function. The deployment of police officers is an operational matter for individual Chief Constables. (2) This table contains full-time equivalent figures that have been rounded to the nearest whole number. (3) Traffic function includes staff who are predominantly employed on motor-cycles or in patrol vehicles for the policing of traffic and motorway related duties. This includes officers employed in accident investigation, vehicle examination and radar duties. Also includes staff who are predominantly employed to support the traffic function of the force including radar, accident investigation, vehicle examination and traffic administration. Includes those officers working with hazardous chemicals, and those administrative staff predominantly serving the internal needs of the traffic function of the force and those officers / staff in supporting roles. (4) Traffic wardens function includes traffic wardens engaged in patrol and other duties. Includes senior traffic wardens who are predominantly employed in the supervision of traffic wardens, otherwise than on patrol. Includes those officers / staff in supporting roles. (5) The decline of police employed traffic wardens over this period reflects the increasing role of local authorities in parking control. (6) Civilian police staff includes s.38 designated officers.

Apprentices

Claire Perry: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of increasing the proportion of apprenticeships for 16 to 17-year-olds by 11 per cent in each year between 2012-13 and 2016-17.

Matthew Hancock: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given by the then Minister of State for Skills and Lifelong Learning, my hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Mr Hayes), to my hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey (Mr Gyimah) on 3 September 2012, Official Report, column reference 267W.

Business: West Midlands

Stephen McCabe: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps his Department has taken to increase the level of access to credit for small businesses in (a) Birmingham and (b) the West Midlands in the last two years.

Michael Fallon: The Government has made it clear that ensuring the flow of credit to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) is essential for support to growth and is a core.
	To support more lending, the Bank of England and HM Treasury launched the Funding for Lending Scheme (FLS) on 13 July. It gives banks strong incentives to boost lending, by lowering interest rates and increasing the availability of business loans and mortgages. It allows banks and building societies to borrow from the Bank of England for up to 4 years; as security against that lending, banks will provide assets, such as business or mortgage loans, to the Bank of England. This will benefit businesses across the country.
	The Government also continues to support lending to businesses through the Enterprise Finance Guarantee Scheme. In the last two years, the number and value of Enterprise Finance Guarantee (EFG) loans to businesses in (a) the six Birmingham constituencies and Sutton Coldfield is 94 with a value of £10.94 million and (b) the West Midlands is 574, with a value of £61.4million.
	Several programmes under the £2.4 billion Regional Growth Fund (RGF) also support SMEs access finance. A number of these are national in scope, such as the schemes run by HSBC, (£25M RGF), Santander (£50M RGF) and RBS (£70M RGF), but there are also schemes focused specifically on the West Midlands run by Bourneville College (£5M RGF) and Herefordshire Council (£1.5M), details of which can be found at:
	http://www.bournville.ac.uk/tag/regional-growth-fund/
	and via:
	http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/.

Education: Prisons

Gordon Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what recent progress his Department has made on awarding the contract to deliver an education service to prisons on the Isle of Sheppey; and if he will make a statement.

Matthew Hancock: The Skills Funding Agency published the outcome of the procurement process to appoint a prison learning provider for Kent and Sussex, including the Isle of Sheppey prisons, on 23 August 2012. The contract has been awarded to The Manchester College.
	We said in 'Making Prisons Work: Skills for Rehabilitation' (May 2011) that we would give prison Governors a decisive role in determining the skills provision in their establishments. None of the tenders submitted in the original September 2011 procurement exercise for prison learning in Kent and Sussex were judged to be acceptable by prison Governors, who were closely involved. The Skills Funding Agency, again working in close collaboration with prison Governors and their Heads of Learning and Skills, commenced a second procurement exercise in April. Bids were again evaluated locally and scored collaboratively, with joint agreement on the successful bidder.
	The contract will be closely monitored, with Governors playing a critical role. Lead Governors will meet quarterly with The Manchester College to discuss and monitor performance across the Kent and Sussex prisons. They will be particularly concerned to ensure the College's sub-contracting and partnership arrangements with local Kent colleges and with key voluntary and charitable sector organisations are operating effectively to deliver the new responsiveness to local needs that I am determined to secure.
	These local Governor-led discussions in Kent and Sussex will replicate those that will take place in all contract areas across England.
	The Skills Funding Agency will work closely with prison Governors to ensure their local discussions with providers are backed up by rigorous and decisive contract compliance action where requested. In addition to a formal, annual review of each of the prison learning contracts, the Agency will act 'out of cycle' where performance data or Ofsted inspections, carried out as part of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons inspections, show that contract requirements are not being met. Decisive action will follow if prison learning contractors fail to deliver.

Electronic Surveillance: Export Controls

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what representations he has received about reports that FinFisher surveillance ware sold by Gamma International UK has been used to monitor human rights activists in Bahrain; if he will make it his policy to put in place export controls on surveillance technology; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Fallon: My right hon. friend the Secretary of State has received no such representations. Some surveillance equipment already falls within the dual-use controls currently applicable in the UK if, for example, it is designed to use controlled cryptography. These controls, agreed at the Wassenaar Arrangement (WA), are set out in Category 5, Part 2 of Annex I to the EU Dual-Use Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009).
	The Government believes that the existence of software designed to penetrate the defences of computers and communications devices and to record, modify and/or relay data without the user's knowledge poses a threat to national security, industry, and commerce, as well as to human rights. Information security is a key concern of governments worldwide and is specifically addressed through existing Wassenaar controls. That is why we consider the WA to be the appropriate forum for considering further controls in this area.
	The Government's view is that concerted action at international level is the best option, if further regulation is required. We do not, have any plans to impose unilateral controls; however we will continue to keep this option under review.

London Metropolitan University

David Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what assessment he has made of the potential effect of withdrawing highly trusted sponsor status from London Metropolitan University on the budget to teach current UK- and EU-domiciled students.

David Willetts: The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) have a responsibility to monitor the financial health of all institutions. They are in regular dialogue with the university to assess the financial implications losing highly trusted status. Our priority is to ensure that all the University's students can access the help and advice they need and we are supporting the university through the recently established Task Force

London Metropolitan University

David Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how his Department will ensure that the withdrawal of London Metropolitan University's highly trusted sponsor status does not diminish the standing of the UK universities amongst international students.

David Willetts: A task force led by Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has been established to help London Metropolitan University to support the overseas students affected by the UK Border Agency's (UKBA) decision to revoke the university's licence to sponsor non-EU students. Its aim is to support London Met and other higher education providers in finding suitable, alternative courses for legitimate students so that they can continue their studies in the UK.
	We recognise the concerns for legitimate overseas students who will be affected by the UKBA decision and our top priority is to ensure that the University's students who are due to commence their studies in 2012-13 are given the help and advice they need. London Metropolitan University has established a Help Centre to support and advise students. Updates and guidance for students and other stakeholders is also available on the London Metropolitan University, HEFCE and UKBA websites.
	Within Government we have developed key messages with supporting questions and answers to provide assurance to international students, overseas governments and other stakeholders. Guidance has already been issued to posts in British embassies and to partner organisations such as the British Council and Universities UK's (UUK) International Unit to ensure greater communications reach.

Olympic Games 2012

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what the evidential basis is for the statement that the UK will make £13 billion from the London 2012 Olympic Games.

Michael Fallon: h olding answer 5 September 2012
	The figure of £13bn is derived from UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) and Visit Britain's forecasts of the potential economic benefit to the UK economy arising from the Games over time. These include new trade and investment deals stimulated by activity during Games time through the British Business Embassy Programme and related events, and in the following four years, including business won from high value opportunities promoted during the Games, business won on the back of the global spot-light afforded by the Games for UK expertise and companies, and an increase in international tourism and investment.
	UK Trade & Investment's forecast took account of: economic benefits generated by Hosts of previous Games; levels of inward investment delivered by UK Trade & Investment since winning the Games and from the Global Investment Conference; current high value opportunities open to UK business; the high level of global business interactions that UKTI will facilitating during and after the summer; and experience from UKTI's Performance Impact and Monitoring Survey (PIMS) data.

Sunday Trading

Gareth Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what assessment his Department has made of the effect of suspending Sunday trading regulations during the Olympic and Paralympic Games on the economy in (a) London and (b) England and Wales.

Michael Fallon: The suspension of the current Sunday trading regulations applies to the specified period from 22 July to 9 September. New legislation would be required for any extension.
	The Department has requested data on the impact of the suspension from a number of large retailers including the impact on sales and employment.
	In addition the Department will analyse the impact on the. retail sales of small retailers using the ONS retail sales index.

Trade: British Overseas Territories

Andrew Percy: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps he is taking to increase trade and investment between the UK and its Overseas Territories.

Michael Fallon: h olding answer 6 September 2012
	The paper “BIS and the Overseas Territories”, published in May 2012, confirmed the UK Government's support for the sustainable economic development of the Overseas Territories, for all of whom, trade is an important part of the Government's ambitious overall vision for the future.
	UK Trade & Investment (UKTI), the Government's trade and inward investment promotion organisation, provides practical support for eligible investors and exporters, and its Spending Review settlement funds its current service offering, with the amount and geographical spread of its overseas resource reflecting demand for support from UK companies and the UK's strategic priorities for markets of the future. Accordingly, UKTI's eligibility criteria specifically require businesses to have a UK operating address before they can be considered for UKTI support. UKTI will, therefore, provide assistance to Overseas Territories businesses where they have an active UK trading address. UKTI will, however, on a case by case basis and resources permitting, consider requests for help from Overseas Territories Companies in liaising with a foreign government on trade and investment promotion issues.

Employment: Lone Parents

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many single parents were (a) in employment and (b) unemployed in (i) Jarrow constituency, (ii) South Tyneside, (iii) the North East and (iv) nationally in each of the last five years.

Nick Hurd: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the authority to reply.
	Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated September 2012
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics,. I have been asked to reply to your question asking what estimate has been made of the number of lone parents who are in a) employment and b) unemployment in (i) Jarrow constituency, (ii) South Tyneside, (iii) the North East and (iv) nationally in each of the last five years. (118925)
	Estimates of the number of lone parents who are in employment and unemployed are derived from the Annual Population Survey (APS) household datasets. However, due to the specific nature of your request it is not possible to provide reliable estimates for Jarrow and South Tyneside because the sample sizes for this survey are not sufficiently large enough. This is also the case for unemployed lone parents in the North East.
	In the tables provided are:
	Number of lone parents in employment in the North East and UK
	Number of lone parents unemployed in the UK
	
		
			 Table 1: Number of lone parents employed (1)  and resident in the North East and the UK in each year since 2007 
			 Thousand 
			 12 months ending  December : North East UK 
			 2007 43 967 
			 2008 44 1,003 
			 2009 46 1,024 
			 2010 47 1,031 
			 2011 40 1,029 
			 (1) Levels of employment are provided for persons aged 16 and over. Source: Annual Population Survey 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: Number of lone parents unemployed (1)  and resident in the UK in each year since 2007 
			 Thousand 
			 12 months ending  December : UK 
			 2007 102 
			 2008 132 
			 2009 160 
			 2010 174 
			 2011 191 
			 (1) Levels of unemployment are provided for persons aged 16 and over. Source: Annual Population Survey

Government Departments: Computer Software

Gordon Henderson: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what estimate he has made of the level of savings which could be achieved if Government departments replaced proprietary software with open source software.

Francis Maude: Open source software can deliver significant savings, as indicated by evidence from both the public and private sectors, in the UK and overseas. However it's not always the best solution, and as such the scenario of replacing all software has not been costed.

Government Departments: Postal Services

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office if he will take steps to encourage Government departments and agencies to use A5 pre-paid envelopes rather than A4; and if he will estimate the potential savings from implementing such a strategy across Government.

Francis Maude: The standardisation and rationalisation of printed products and envelopes is a core objective of the Print Strategy for Central Government. Work is already under way to build on previous successful initiatives like transferring from C4 to C5 envelopes and is expected to make savings.
	The lack of historic spend information at unit pricing level prevents an accurate forecast of potential savings. However, this data is now captured and we will be able to quantify savings going forward.

Public Sector: Procurement

Peter Aldous: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what steps his Department is taking to streamline and simplify public sector procurement to make it easier for small and medium-sized enterprises to win public sector contracts.

Richard Graham: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office 
	(1)  what steps his Department is taking to make it easier for small and medium-sized enterprises to win public sector contracts;
	(2)  how many small and medium-sized enterprises in (a) Gloucester, (b) the South West and (c) England have won public sector contracts in each of the last five years.

David Evennett: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what recent estimate he has made of the proportion of Government procurement contracts that have been won by small and medium-sized businesses.

Francis Maude: Over the past 18 months we have opened up the way Government does business in order to ensure that small companies, charities and voluntary organisations are in the best possible position to compete for contracts. We have also:
	made public procurement more transparent by publishing tenders and contracts through the 'Contracts Finder' website.
	introduced a new eSourcing solution, the Dynamic Marketplace, on which SMEs are able to provide quick quotes for low value contracts (below £100,000).
	piloted a new online service for procurers to invite the SME market to respond, in advance of a formal procurement, to emerging opportunities to deliver government business more efficiently.
	introduced a 'Mystery Shopper' scheme to allow suppliers to report bad procurement practice.
	published pipelines of Government Business to enable suppliers to marshal their resources and prepare to bid for future work.
	worked actively with Government departments to ensure that, where practicable, procurements are broken up into smaller lots. This will ensure that we create diversity in the supply base and in particular increase the number of SMEs awarded new business directly.
	Furthermore, we have introduced a new LEAN sourcing process for central government which aims to reduce procurement timescales substantially. Departments must procure all but the most complex goods and services within 120 days
	On 9 March we published the "One Year On" Progress Report, which gives a breakdown by department of spend with Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs), up to December 2011. The Report is available at:
	http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/making-government-business-more-accessible-smes-one-year
	Since January 2011, central Government Departments have been required to publish on Contracts Finder information on the contracts they award, at:
	www.contractsfinder.businesslink.gov.uk/
	We do not hold contract information broken down regionally, but prior to 2010 very limited information was held or published on any government contract spend.

Air Passenger Duty

Andrew Turner: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much his Department has raised from air passenger duty in each year since 2007; if he will estimate the proportion of the change in each such year that results from (a) higher duty levels and (b) an increase in flights in each such year; and if he will estimate the amount paid per individual in each such year.

Sajid Javid: No breakdown between duty levels and the number of flights is available for air passenger duty revenues. However, data on air passenger duty receipts and passenger numbers is published online at:
	https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/Pages/TaxAndDutyBulletins.aspx

Banks

Priti Patel: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his Department considered undertaking a consultation on the separation of high street banking divisions from investing banking divisions.

Greg Clark: The Government is currently consulting, in the Banking Reform White Paper, on the separation of retail and investment banking as recommended by the Independent Commission on Banking. The consultation closed on 6 September.
	The Government will carry out pre-legislative scrutiny on the Bill in the autumn, and plans to complete all necessary legislation by the end of this Parliament.

Business: Loans

Priti Patel: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider establishing a facility within the Bank of England to lend directly to businesses.

Greg Clark: The Government is not considering establishing a facility within the Bank of England to lend directly to businesses.

Debts

Damian Hinds: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent estimate he has made of the average level of non-mortgage debt per (a) person and (b) household, by (i) age group and (ii) income or socioeconomic group.

Sajid Javid: The ONS do not provide information on non-mortgage debt by age or by income group. Data published by the ONS show that the stock of unsecured lending per person was £3,300 in June 2012. The stock of unsecured lending per household was £7,800 in June 2012.

Financial Services: Education

Mark Garnier: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions he has had with the Money Advice Service on financial education in schools; and if he will make a statement.

Greg Clark: Treasury Ministers have discussions with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors. As was the case with previous administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such discussions.
	Details of MAS's financial education work in 2011-12 and its planned work for
	2012-13 can be found in its annual review for 2011-12 published in August.
	The business plan and annual review can be found at:
	www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/static/publications

Pensions

John Mann: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has any plans to investigate the financial situation of pensioners with drawdown pensions.

David Gauke: The Government continually keeps all aspects of its policies under review and is committed to maintaining flexibility for those with drawdown arrangements.

Personal Savings

Damian Hinds: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent estimate he has made of the average level of non-retirement savings per (a) person and (b) household, by (i) age group and (ii) income or socioeconomic group.

Sajid Javid: The ONS do not provide information on non-retirement savings by age or by income group. Some additional information of interest may be found in the ONS wealth and asset survey. Data from the ONS show total financial assets excluding pensions and reserves were approximately £34,000 per person and £80,000 per household, in June 2012.

Royal Bank of Scotland and Ulster Bank

Margaret Ritchie: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland Finance Minister on the Ulster Bank technical incident compensation scheme;
	(2)  what discussions he has had with representatives of Royal Bank of Scotland and Ulster Bank on the technical incident compensation scheme.

Greg Clark: Ministers speak to the Northern Irish finance minister regularly on a range of issues.
	During RBS's difficulties, Ministers and officials, alongside other regulatory bodies, had regular contact with the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) to ensure that they were doing everything they could to resolve their technical difficulties as quickly as possible.
	The Government welcomes RBS and its subsidiary Ulster Bank's decision to compensate customers for the difficulties they faced. However, the specifics of the compensation scheme are a commercial matter for the bank and for the Financial Services Authority (FSA).
	RBS have committed to carry out a full and detailed investigation into the causes of the problem, overseen by independent experts, and to publish the findings.

Stamp Duty Land Tax

David Hamilton: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  how many people benefited from the stamp duty land tax relief available to first-time buyers on purchases under £250,000 between 25 March 2010 and 24 March 2012 in (a) Midlothian constituency, (b) Scotland and (c) the UK;
	(2)  how much revenue has been raised from stamp duty land tax for properties under £250,000 since 24 March 2012; and how many transactions were for (a) first-time buyers and (b) other buyers;
	(3)  what assessment he made of the effects on the ability of people to gain access to the housing market of the stamp duty land tax relief available to first-time buyers on purchases under £250,000 between 25 March 2010 and 24 March 2012.

Sajid Javid: HMRC published a document in November last year evaluating the impact of first time buyers' relief on stamp duty land tax (SDLT), which is available online at:
	www.hmrc.gov.uk/research/sdlt-ftb-workingpaper.pdf
	This evaluation was based upon claims made up until August 2011. The analysis concluded that SDLT relief did not have a significant impact in terms of improving the affordability of residential property for first time buyers.
	The estimated number of transactions that benefitted from first time buyers' relief in Scotland was 9,800. For the UK as a whole, this number was 179,200. HMRC is unable to provide reliable data on first time buyers' at a constituency level.
	In the period between 25 March and 31 July 2012, an estimated £235 million was raised through stamp duty land tax for residential properties under £250,000.
	It is not possible to distinguish between first-time buyers and other buyers during this period.

Carbon Emissions: Business

Teresa Pearce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate he has made of the monetary value of the associated benefits of introducing mandatory carbon reporting for (a) listed companies on the London Stock Exchange, (b) listed companies on the Alternative Investment Market and (c) all companies covered under the Companies Act 2006.

Richard Benyon: holding answer 6 September 2012
	The final impact assessment for company greenhouse gas reporting, which is available on DEFRA's website, identified that there were approximately 1,100 quoted companies, i.e. UK-incorporated companies that are listed on the main market of the London Stock Exchange (or on the New York Stock Exchange or officially listed in a European economic area state). The estimated impacts for all quoted companies (option 2 in the impact assessment) over 10 years are compliance costs of £28 million and benefits of up to £741 million.
	No estimate was made of the costs and benefits for all companies. Option 3 in the impact assessment looked at introducing mandatory reporting for all large companies (as defined by the Companies Act 2006), which would cover approximately 24,000 large companies. Option 3 provides the widest coverage of companies modelled in the final impact assessment and could include some companies on the alternative-investment market.
	The costs and benefits of companies listed on the alternative investment market have not been monetised.

Fishing Catches

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  to which geographical areas the discard ban to begin in 2015 will apply;
	(2)  when he expects a discard ban to be fully implemented under the Common Fisheries Policy.

Richard Benyon: The UK successfully made the case for the phased introduction of a landing obligation for commercial fish species throughout EU waters in the General Approach on the draft Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Regulation that was agreed by European Fisheries Ministers in June 2012. The General Approach includes a provisional date of 1 January 2014 for a landing obligation for pelagic species, with a phased introduction, starting in 2015 and fully in place by 2018, for other Northern Atlantic .fisheries. For other waters, including the Mediterranean and Black Sea, the provisional phase-in period is from 2016 to 2019.
	These dates are not yet agreed, however, as the relevant provisions are still under negotiation. The European Parliament is also now considering the CFP proposals.

Floods: Insurance

Nigel Adams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the written statement of 11 July 2012, Official Report, columns 29-30WS, on managing the impacts of flooding, 
	(1)  when his Department expects to make a final announcement on its plans for the future of flood insurance following the expiry of the Statement of Principles;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the scope for improving the affordability of insurance in flood risk areas without increasing costs for those not at risk;
	(3)  what assessment he has made of the level of the current cross-subsidy in place between policyholders for insurance in flood risk areas and non-flood risk areas and of how this might be used to improve the affordability of insurance for those at flood risk.

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent meetings he has had with representatives of insurance companies to discuss the replacement of the Statement of Principles for flood insurance when it expires in 2013; and if he will make a statement.

Richard Benyon: At present, the majority of households at significant flood risk do not pay a price that reflects their flood risk. Industry figures suggest that the cross-subsidy is around £150 million per year and that on average each high risk households benefit from a £430 cross-subsidy (Association of British Insurers, (ABI) 2010).
	We are looking to develop with insurers a model that delivers benefits to households in need of support while avoiding poorer policyholders subsidising wealthier ones.
	A number of options are under consideration, including an industry-led levy that would allow policyholders in high flood risk areas to continue to secure affordable insurance without having an impact on bills more generally since it would reflect existing pricing arrangements.
	Our priority is to resolve detailed design issues. Ministers continue to meet regularly with representatives from the insurance industry including with the ABI regarding the future of flood insurance. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such meetings.
	Discussions with the industry continue to be positive and further announcements will be forthcoming in due course.

Pets: Sales

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what guidance his Department issues on the (a) housing and (b) sale of animals in pet shops; what recent representations he has received on the issue; and if he will make a statement.

David Heath: Guidance for local authorities and pet shops on the welfare of animals sold in pet shops is contained in the publication ‘Model Standards for Pet Shop Licence Conditions’, which is produced jointly by the British Veterinary Association, the Chartered Institute for Environmental Health, the Ornamental Aquatic Trade Association and the Pet Care Trust. We understand that industry and welfare groups are looking to update the guidance. The Government therefore has no need to issue any guidance in this area. We are not aware of having received any representations in this area.

Pets: Sales

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what exotic animals may lawfully be sold in pet shops; whether he plans to make changes to that regime; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  whether he plans to amend the regulatory system governing the sale of exotic animals and dangerous animals in pet shops; and if he will make a statement.

David Heath: There is no definitive list of animals that may be sold in pet shops. However, there are restrictions in place, for mainly conservation purposes, on the sale of certain species. There are no proposals to make any changes to this arrangement. The protection of the welfare of all animals in pet shops is provided under the Pet Animals Act 1951 and the Animal Welfare Act 2006.
	These Acts make it an offence for an owner or keeper to fail to provide for the welfare needs of their animal. The Pet Animals Act requires that any person selling pet animals must be licensed by their local authority. Before granting a licence, the authority must satisfy itself that the animals are kept in accommodation that is suitable and clean, that they are supplied with the appropriate food and drink, and are protected from disease and fire. Local authorities can only issue licences to applicants who will safeguard their animals' welfare in respect of providing accommodation, adequate and suitable food, drink and bedding, protection in the case of an emergency, prevention and control of infectious diseases, and the animal's ability to take adequate exercise. There are serious penalties for committing an offence under either of these Acts.
	In addition, the UK Government is committed to working with other countries to promote the conservation of the world's wildlife, including exotic animals, for example through membership of agreements such as the convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (CITES). Through CITES, 175 countries work to protect endangered species of plants and animals from unsustainable levels of trade by prohibiting, restricting or monitoring international trade in them. CITES prohibits the sale of wild-taken specimens of the most endangered species apart from in exceptional circumstances. Given the protection afforded to exotic animals under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the Pet Animals Act 1951 (as amended in 1983), the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 and the CITES agreement and EU Welfare in Transport Regulation (EC) No. 1/200, we do not feel there is a need for the selling and keeping of all exotic species to be prohibited. While it is unacceptable to cause unnecessary suffering to, or fail to provide for, an animal's welfare, we do not consider that the failings of a few should result in an outright prohibition for everyone else.

Pets: Sales

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether he plans to review regulations regarding pet shops in respect of (a) the age at which children can buy animals and (b) the conditions in which animals are kept; and if he will make a statement.

David Heath: There are no proposals to review the regulations relating to the welfare of animals sold in pet shops. The minimum age at which a. person can buy animals (16 years) is contained in the Animal Welfare Act 2006, which was reviewed in 2010. There were no proposals to change the minimum age.

Plastic Bags

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment he has made of the implications for her policies of the evaluation of the introduction of the single-use carrier bag charge in Wales: Attitude change and behavioural spillover; and if he will make a statement.

Richard Benyon: We are monitoring the results of the charging scheme in Wales and the outcome of the consultations on a charge in other parts of the UK. We are concerned about the use of single-use carrier bags and the effect they have on the environment. The key message remains to reuse bags as often as possible.

Rights of Way

Gordon Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what advice his Department provides to landowners on restoring public rights of way affected by the growing of crops; and if he will make a statement.

Richard Benyon: Under section 137A of the Highways Act 1980 it is an offence, subject to certain conditions, for a crop to encroach over a highway, and enforcement of the legislation is by the local highway authority. The need to restore public rights of way on land on which crops are grown is also a requirement under the Cross Compliance Regulations.
	DEFRA provides relevant guidance to landowners in the Natural England publication 'Managing Public Access' and in the Rural Payment Agency's two publications on cross compliance, 'Guide to Cross Compliance in England', and 'Guidance in Cross Compliance in England: Management of Habitats and Landscape features'. The guidance states that the surface of disturbed cross-field footpaths or bridleways must be restored to the required width within specified periods of time.

Civil Disorder

Richard Graham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people in (a) Gloucester and (b) England have been prosecuted for crimes carried out during the public disorder of August 2011 to date.

Jeremy Wright: Based on data available as at 8 June 2012, four defendants from Gloucester had been proceeded against for offences related to the public disorder between 6 to 9 August 2011.
	Based on data available as at 8 June 2012, 2,709 defendants from England had been proceeded against for offences related to the public disorder between 6 to 9 August 2011.

Fire Prevention

George Freeman: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many fire protection units his Department has procured from (a) Protec plc., (b) Xcell Misting Limited and (c) Cleanwright Limited in the last five years.

Jeremy Wright: The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not procured fire protection units directly from Xcell Misting Ltd or Cleanwright Ltd in the last five years. The MoJ has procured works from Protec under its Fire and General Alarm Framework in its capacity as a Prime Contractor responsible for the total scope of in cell Fire detection equipment and Alarms Systems throughout the MoJ Estate. These works included the installation of the six fixed hose reel misting units as part of the recent 'Replace Fire and General Alarms' scheme at HMP Belmarsh.

G4S

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether G4S is involved in any contracts at the courts in Colchester.

Jeremy Wright: Ministry of Justice Procurement Directorate can confirm G4S is not involved in any contracts specifically for courts in Colchester.
	G4S are a contracted provider for other business areas of the MOJ. and for the prisoner escort services in Scotland. On occasion they may be required to deliver prisoners to the courts in Colchester from other areas of the country.

Prisoners: Foreign Nationals

Gareth Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many people are currently held in prisons in Kent;
	(2)  how many (a) EU and (b) non-EU foreign nationals are currently serving custodial sentences in (i) Kent and (ii) the UK; and what the cost to the public purse is of maintaining those prisoners;
	(3)  how many foreign nationals are currently held in prisons in (a) Kent and (b) the UK; and what the cost to the public purse is of maintaining those prisoners.

Jeremy Wright: As at 30 June 2012. the number of prisoners in Kent prison establishments was 4,833.
	The following table provides relevant information on the current foreign national prison population in Kent prison establishments.
	The cost of foreign national prisoners is not separately calculated.
	The latest available estimated average annual overall cost per prisoner in England and Wales for the financial year 2010-11 is £37,000 (to nearest £1.000).
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
	
		
			 Foreign national prison population for Kent establishments (1)  and England and Wales, 30 June 2012 
			  EU national prisoners Non EU national prisoners Total foreign national prisoners 
			  Sentenced (2) Non-sentenced Total Sentenced (2) Non-sentenced Total Sentenced (2) Non-sentenced Total 
			 Kent 301 42 343 569 327 896 870 369 1,239 
			 England and Wales 2,808 1,000 3,808 4,886 2,167 7,053 7,694 3,167 10,861 
			 (1) Includes the following establishments: Blantyre House, Canterbury, Cookham Wood, Dover IRC, East Sutton Park, Elmley. Maidstone, Rochester, Stanford Hill and Swaleside. (2) Includes immediate custody, fine defaulters and recalls.

Prisons and Probation Ombudsman

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what funding he plans to provide to the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO) in each of the next three years; what discussions he has had with the PPO on its future funding since May 2010; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Wright: A budgetary allocation will be settled with the Prison and Ombudsman that will enable the Ombudsman to deliver his functions but drive down any inefficiencies. The funding for the Prisons and Ombudsman for the next financial year (2013-14) is currently being agreed. Officials from the Ministry of Justice fully discuss funding before budgets are allocated for each upcoming financial year. The Prison and Probation Ombudsman also discussed the pressures on resources with the previous Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke), in May 2012.

Prisons and Probation Ombudsman

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent representations he has received on the work of the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Wright: The Secretary of State occasionally receives letters from Members of Parliament on behalf of their constituents who are themselves, or whose family are involved in investigations carried out by the Prison and Probation Ombudsman.

Prisons and Probation Ombudsman

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was awarded in compensation to complainants whose complaints were upheld by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman in each year since 2010; how much was awarded in each such case; what guidance his Department has issued on the level of compensation to be awarded; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Wright: The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman does not award compensation to complainants but can recommend that the service in remit pays the complainant a suitable sum of compensation for loss or damage to property. Where compensation is recommended, the Ombudsman's aim is to return the complainant to the position he or she would have been in if the loss or damage had not occurred.
	In 2010-11 the Ombudsman recommended that compensation be paid in 17 cases. The sums ranged from £15 to £433. with the average being £128. In 2011-12 the Ombudsman recommended that compensation be paid in 23 cases. The sums ranged from £5 to £1,500. with the average being £144.
	Following an investigation by the Ombudsman, some complainants may go on to seek damages for personal injury through the courts.
	The Department does not issue guidance on the level of compensation for either loss of property or damages in civil litigation arising from a complaint investigated by the Ombudsman. Each case is considered on its own merits so general guidance would not be appropriate.

Sexual Offences: Approved Premises

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  whether he has any plans to review the guidelines relating to proximity required between approved premises which accommodate sex offenders and schools, nurseries and playgrounds;
	(2)  which approved premises host sex offenders and are within a quarter of a mile of a primary school.

Jeremy Wright: Approved premises provide for enhanced supervision of certain high risk of harm offenders, particularly on release from custody, which allows them to be supervised far more closely than if they were housed in less suitable accommodation elsewhere in the community.
	Under national policy, child sex offenders are excluded from approved premises that are directly adjacent to a school or a nursery. There are 14 approved premises covered by the national policy which exclude child sex offenders. All approved premises, including these 14, are able to house adult sex offenders (that is, those whose sexual offences are against adults). The policy was agreed to strengthen public confidence in the systems in place to protect the public from known child sex offenders. However, there is no evidence that accommodating sex offenders in approved premises near to schools, nurseries or playgrounds increases the risk to their users. Therefore, we have no plans to review the policy. Admissions to any approved premises are based on an assessment of risk in the individual case, and an offender will not be accommodated in a particular location if the risk cannot be effectively managed in the approved premises concerned.
	Details of all the schools, nurseries and playgrounds located within a specific radius of an approved premises are not held centrally. The information requested could be provided only through a detailed search of the geographical area of each approved premises and so could be done only at disproportionate cost.

Sexual Offences: Approved Premises

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  whether he has considered the request from Sandbach Town Council to add Linden Bank in Elworth, Cheshire, to the list of approved premises not permitted to accommodate sex offenders;
	(2)  whether he has considered the request from Sandbach Town Council to close Linden Bank approved premises in Elworth, Cheshire; and if he will make a statement.

Jeremy Wright: I am afraid my office has no record of receiving any correspondence from Sandbach Town Council.
	The Government does not intend to close the approved premises in question, or to bar it from accepting child sex offenders. This is because approved premises are a vital resource in the management of high-risk offenders on release from custody. Without them, the management of these offenders would be less effective and risk to the public would be greater. Approved premises which are directly adjacent to a school or nursery are barred from accepting child sex offenders. Linden Bank approved premises is not in that category.

Alcoholic Drinks: Misuse

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people were admitted to hospital with suspected alcohol-related conditions of each (a) age and (b) gender in each region in each of the last five years.

Daniel Poulter: The following tables contains estimates of the number of admissions involving a mention of an alcohol-related condition. as a primary or secondary diagnosis, split by age, gender and strategic health authority for the years 2006-07 to 2010-11.
	The figures include estimates based on other admissions for conditions partially attributable to alcohol, as well as counts of admissions with a condition wholly attributable to alcohol. The former are calculated using evidence about the proportion of diseases and injuries attributable to alcohol.
	The data in the tables should not be described as a count of people as the same person may have been admitted on more than one occasion.
	The attributable fractions are not applicable to children under 16. Therefore figures for this age group relate only to wholly-attributable admissions.
	
		
			 Estimated number of admissions with a condition i) wholly attributable and ii) other admissions with a condition partially attributable to alcohol split by age, gender and SHA of residence for the years 2006-07 to 2010-11 
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector — 2010-11 
			   East Midlands Strategic Health Authority East  of  England Strategic Health Authority London Strategic Health Authority North East Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q33 Q35 Q36 Q30 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 5 3 2 2 7 5 2 1 
			  10-19 437 416 383 417 461 592 500 467 
			  20-29 1,630 942 1,283 750 2,009 1,202 2,007 994 
			  30-39 2,566 1,304 2,013 1,170 4,093 1,761 2,510 1,358 
			  40-49 3,818 1,750 3,308 1,740 6,452 2,562 3,411 1,809 
			  50-59 2,965 1,438 3,059 1,271 6,060 1,922 3,151 1,431 
			  60-69 2,216 753 2,548 931 4,458 1,069 2,135 684 
			  70-79 862 353 1,014 397 2,177 568 942 268 
			  80 and over 261 136 354 175 627 306 224 129 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 560 697 570 629 780 762 397 435 
			  20-29 1,491 1,708 1,385 1,639 2,394 2,605 1,109 1,228 
			  30-39 1,627 1,871 1,734 1,970 3,144 3,283 1,219 1,301 
			  40-49 3,745 2,908 4,342 3,417 6,685 5,071 2,854 2,279 
			  50-59 7,179 4,176 8,576 4,891 11,795 6,479 5,909 3,461 
			  60-69 11,741 5,821 15,339 7,487 15,110 7,606 9,204 4,596 
			  70-79 11,442 5,998 16,085 8,048 15,879 8,180 9,119 4,936 
			  80 and over 8,483 7,015 12,673 9,899 11,615 9,590 5,824 5,015 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector — 2010-11 
			   North West Strategic Health Authority South Central Strategic Health Authority South East Coast Strategic Health Authority South West Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q31 Q38 Q37 Q39 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 11 11 2 4 — 5 2 2 
			  10-19 1,149 1,316 281 385 440 438 634 615 
			  20-29 3,863 2,120 1,013 675 1,141 686 1,808 1,120 
			  30-39 6,449 3,845 1,556 804 1,678 976 2,619 1,264 
			  40-49 10,798 5,281 2,324 1,199 2,759 1,492 4,099 2,192 
		
	
	
		
			  50-59 8,905 3,833 2,002 923 2,497 1,145 3,647 1,654 
			  60-69 5,986 2,289 1,714 615 2,051 668 3,330 1,017 
			  70-79 2,471 904 714 249 804 302 1,340 509 
			  80 and over 664 363 240 188 322 177 467 223 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 1,059 1,123 384 448 421 536 627 712 
			  20-29 2,799 3,315 999 1,145 1,043 1,272 1,481 1,720 
			  30-39 3,120 3,275 1,129 1,232 1,257 1,484 1,723 1,787 
			  40-49 7,195 5,027 2,551 1,879 3,116 2,382 4,039 3,290 
			  50-59 13,279 7,385 4,632 2,619 6,081 3,169 7,671 4,648 
			  60-69 20,869 10,319 7,370 3,626 10,421 4,936 14,494 7,054 
			  70-79 20,318 11,081 7,609 3,912 10,960 5,672 14,703 7,504 
			  80 and over 13,441 11,625 6,146 5,197 9,445 8,058 11,972 9,819 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector — 2010-11 
			   West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Yorkshire and  t he Humber Strategic Health Authority England — not otherwise specified Unknown 
			   Q34 Q32 U Y 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 5 7 6 2 — — 2 — 
			  10-19 635 607 710 603 44 18 66 44 
			  20-29 1,903 974 2,337 1,351 407 99 415 110 
			  30-39 3,388 1,527 3,752 1,875 951 129 572 111 
			  40-49 5,208 2,284 5,344 2,501 1,117 112 685 117 
			  50-59 4,213 1,721 4,349 1,830 582 112 395 89 
			  60-69 3,332 1,025 3,010 1,099 196 11 166 36 
			  70-79 1,251 362 1,174 485 50 — 50 20 
			  80 and over 416 184 369 177 61 16 90 14 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 664 877 703 747 20 19 22 25 
			  20-29 1,721 2,090 1,806 2,060 97 25 112 55 
			  30-39 2,047 2,342 2,047 2,257 103 25 94 50 
			  40-49 4,646 3,902 4,574 3,524 95 20 132 51 
			  50-59 8,637 5,460 8,356 4,992 51 17 143 68 
			  60-69 14,355 7,487 13,303 6,759 27 10 178 78 
			  70-79 14,361 7,618 13,340 7,172 25 6 183 120 
			  80 and over 10,198 8,662 9,401 8,043 28 17 215 193 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2009-10 
			   East Midlands Strategic Health Authority East  of  England Strategic Health Authority London Strategic Health Authority North East Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q33 Q35 Q36 Q30 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 4 3 2 2 5 2 2 1 
			  10-19 502 429 387 348 511 507 558 550 
		
	
	
		
			  20-29 1,555 841 1,166 738 1,913 957 1,876 930 
			  30-39 2,454 1,247 1,954 1,052 3,741 1,657 2,681 1,304 
			  40-49 3,904 1,735 3,163 1,489 5,895 2,227 3,201 1,678 
			  50-59 2,834 1,308 2,787 1,243 5,104 1,806 2,910 1,300 
			  60-69 1,954 704 2,092 718 3,853 965 1,824 634 
			  70-79 714 303 908 291 1,848 498 758 244 
			  80 and over 237 114 348 158 485 270 170 119 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 625 661 500 533 733 735 414 413 
			  20-29 1,405 1,648 1,332 1,521 2,292 2,444 1,067 1,057 
			  30-39 1,673 1,819 1,731 1,839 2,947 3,044 1,170 1,174 
			  40-49 3,576 2,767 4,196 3,017 5,976 4,275 2,618 2,097 
			  50-59 6,576 3,857 7,631 4,475 10,005 5,428 5,238 3,118 
			  60-69 10,741 5,243 13,218 6,503 12,731 6,538 8,263 4,067 
			  70-79 10,499 5,458 14,284 7,163 13,516 7,119 8,168 4,478 
			  80 and over 7,752 6,360 10,934 8,705 9,672 8,242 5,079 4,415 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2009-10 
			   North West Strategic Health Authority South Central Strategic Health Authority South East Coast Strategic Health Authority South West Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q31 Q38 Q37 Q39 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 13 17 2 1 4 3 4 3 
			  10-19 1,232 1,326 331 400 408 529 650 633 
			  20-29 3,677 2,071 855 537 1,147 756 1,771 968 
			  30-39 6,440 3,492 1,525 764 1,675 896 2,653 1,239 
			  40-49 10,226 4,943 2,028 1,155 2,683 1,475 3,764 1,941 
			  50-59 8,274 3,517 1,909 825 2,221 994 3,372 1,425 
			  60-69 5,490 1,993 1,498 471 1,756 575 2,868 826 
			  70-79 2,299 831 608 258 805 312 1,176 513 
			  80 and over 607 298 196 126 270 148 412 219 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 1,085 1,127 396 435 495 487 652 713 
			  20-29 2,729 3,150 978 991 1,042 1,222 1,443 1,564 
			  30-39 3,099 3,295 1,091 1,142 1,256 1,392 1,584 1,736 
			  40-49 6,754 4,702 2,364 1,687 2,861 2,164 3,609 2,990 
			  50-59 12,609 6,772 4,085 2,312 5,251 2,867 6,997 4,170 
			  60-69 19,181 9,536 6,526 3,181 9,083 4,276 12,614 6,019 
			  70-79 18,900 10,279 6,765 3,558 9,639 5,079 13,187 6,778 
			  80 and over 12,066 10,743 5,351 4,807 8,155 7,046 10,399 9,047 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2009-10 
			   West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Yorkshire and the Humber Strategic Health Authority England — not otherwise specified Unknown 
			   Q34 Q32 U Y 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 8 8 9 6 1 1 — — 
			  10-19 663 606 645 633 56 21 72 59 
			  20-29 1,918 953 2,066 1,032 402 86 406 110 
			  30-39 3,119 1,393 3,449 1,690 1,003 131 637 144 
			  40-49 5,087 2,109 4,793 2,086 1,162 98 897 135 
			  50-59 3,922 1,514 3,822 1,467 567 80 415 84 
			  60-69 2,935 944 2,552 802 221 13 187 22 
			  70-79 1,019 365 1,012 343 26 2 41 6 
			  80 and over 384 191 275 130 76 10 104 20 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 665 733 724 772 23 10 37 22 
			  20-29 1,714 1,967 1,803 1,997 89 26 119 59 
			  30-39 2,037 2,231 1,954 2,122 99 22 127 53 
			  40-49 4,289 3,584 4,052 3,303 93 14 137 57 
			  50-59 8,041 4,999 7,361 4,336 45 9 162 63 
			  60-69 12,914 6,844 11,521 5,863 27 6 157 68 
			  70-79 12,932 6,975 11,529 6,363 20 7 138 77 
			  80 and over 8,738 7,702 8,116 7,161 28 18 118 160 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2008-09 
			   East Midlands Strategic Health Authority East  of  England Strategic Health Authority London Strategic Health Authority North East Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q33 Q35 Q36 Q30 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 2 4 2 2 8 3 6 4 
			  10-19 473 465 390 340 428 497 539 514 
			  20-29 1,329 864 1,096 628 1,616 919 1,924 937 
			  30-39 2,401 1,134 1,712 999 3,445 1,335 2,298 1,257 
			  40-49 3,410 1,610 2,739 1,380 5,177 1,828 2,941 1,405 
			  50-59 2,520 1,098 2,355 968 4,730 1,427 2,650 1,173 
			  60-69 1,703 585 1,920 655 3,311 825 1,631 526 
			  70-79 764 242 733 283 1,491 431 682 267 
			  80 and over 256 130 260 121 421 247 157 81 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 589 681 510 538 640 684 451 387 
			  20-29 1,336 1,605 1,251 1,340 2,089 2,238 1,074 1,035 
			  30-39 1,563 1,740 1,595 1,617 2,650 2,780 1,174 1,128 
			  40-49 3,167 2,593 3,468 2,632 5,205 3,709 2,499 1,966 
			  50-59 5,971 3,484 6,877 3,795 8,660 4,644 4,947 2,934 
			  60-69 9,572 4,798 11,274 5,402 11,201 5,601 7,340 3,883 
			  70-79 9,394 4,799 12,141 6,045 11,502 5,964 7,498 4,110 
			  80 and over 6,754 5,699 9,068 7,504 8,148 7,185 4,555 3,990 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2008-09 
			   North West Strategic Health Authority South Central Strategic Health Authority South East Coast Strategic Health Authority South West Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q31 Q38 Q37 Q39 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 10 12 6 8 6 4 5 3 
			  10-19 1,206 1,304 299 423 442 465 585 635 
			  20-29 3,387 1,875 791 443 1,057 654 1,678 855 
			  30-39 5,879 3,134 1,390 685 1,686 858 2,350 1,177 
			  40-49 9,122 4,319 1,738 973 2,485 1,367 3,536 1,888 
			  50-59 7,107 3,043 1,838 735 2,003 909 3,086 1,246 
			  60-69 4,758 1,669 1,232 478 1,600 515 2,312 850 
			  70-79 2,047 651 555 231 741 260 1,066 469 
			  80 and over 524 244 205 94 238 174 353 217 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 1,104 980 413 428 461 479 612 686 
			  20-29 2,723 2,881 956 984 1,016 1,095 1,487 1,440 
			  30-39 3,172 3,006 1,098 1,042 1,225 1,352 1,587 1,754 
			  40-49 6,291 4,088 2,164 1,531 2,678 1,940 3,280 2,694 
			  50-59 11,262 6,109 3,707 2,091 4,825 2,682 6,301 3,971 
			  60-69 16,749 8,488 5,809 2,874 8,025 3,842 11,310 5,586 
			  70-79 16,626 9,169 6,044 3,209 8,751 4,522 11,822 6,214 
			  80 and over 10,313 9,638 4,610 4,078 7,188 6,393 9,210 8,223 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2008-09 
			   West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Yorkshire  and the  Humber Strategic Health Authority England  — not otherwise specified Unknown 
			   Q34 Q32 U Y 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 8 5 8 3 1 — 3 — 
			  10-19 580 623 616 623 65 24 93 70 
			  20-29 1,735 856 1,892 975 360 97 386 96 
			  30-39 3,031 1,292 3,004 1,514 968 139 597 170 
			  40-49 4,598 1,918 4,112 1,822 1,159 98 854 142 
			  50-59 3,499 1,351 3,105 1,268 600 47 460 76 
			  60-69 2,427 791 2,086 669 147 6 179 35 
			  70-79 1,031 347 827 309 39 17 57 14 
			  80 and over 302 151 252 105 77 17 78 20 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 678 671 720 736 22 21 36 33 
			  20-29 1,611 1,941 1,813 1,883 116 38 125 73 
			  30-39 1,913 2,151 1,840 1,960 131 28 129 70 
			  40-49 3,987 3,338 3,597 2,849 132 13 160 55 
			  50-59 7,687 4,838 6,345 3,845 66 18 144 57 
			  60-69 12,308 6,324 9,541 4,959 49 16 133 65 
			  70-79 11,907 6,278 9,860 5,464 27 10 133 74 
			  80 and over 7,594 6,792 6,736 6,054 27 18 148 302 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2007-08 
			   East Midlands Strategic Health Authority East  of  England Strategic Health Authority London Strategic Health Authority North East Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q33 Q35 Q36 Q30 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 4 5 3 6 11 3 13 4 
			  10-19 537 559 432 434 479 591 566 613 
			  20-29 1,335 827 1,013 533 1,545 891 1,553 858 
			  30-39 2,251 1,053 1,640 890 3,348 1,253 2,086 1,176 
			  40-49 3,029 1,475 2,677 1,281 5,126 1,876 2,816 1,379 
			  50-59 2,239 1,046 2,252 943 4,608 1,364 2,333 1,108 
			  60-69 1,451 568 1,632 695 3,095 782 1,420 466 
			  70-79 613 265 676 270 1,276 366 602 228 
			  80 and over 182 82 204 123 424 173 153 69 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 562 608 551 533 744 677 461 437 
			  20-29 1,338 1,486 1,212 1,301 2,150 2,141 1,033 995 
			  30-39 1,553 1,768 1,552 1,671 2,587 2,640 1,071 1,086 
			  40-49 2,916 2,401 3,401 2,455 4,949 3,356 2,299 1,753 
			  50-59 5,391 3,197 6,437 3,513 7,666 4,193 4,357 2,552 
			  60-69 8,385 4,220 10,336 5,000 9,979 4,865 6,492 3,341 
			  70-79 8,379 4,417 10,930 5,626 10,275 5,432 6,431 3,594 
			  80 and over 5,825 4,965 7,832 6,677 6,934 6,302 3,895 3,525 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2007-08 
			   North West Strategic Health Authority South Central Strategic Health Authority South East Coast Strategic Health Authority South West Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q31 Q38 Q37 Q39 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 12 8 6 2 6 1 5 11 
			  10-19 1,346 1,547 385 442 511 523 622 689 
			  20-29 3,539 1,797 792 532 1,066 618 1,352 731 
			  30-39 5,793 3,062 1,289 646 1,620 882 2,071 1,113 
			  40-49 8,647 4,025 1,665 1,005 2,254 1,260 3,053 1,651 
			  50-59 6,627 3,044 1,724 654 1,965 854 3,003 1,160 
			  60-69 4,296 1,557 1,081 419 1,516 454 2,124 764 
			  70-79 1,825 597 548 197 690 247 873 378 
			  80 and over 411 231 155 85 210 133 296 164 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 1,193 1,108 382 436 480 418 650 632 
			  20-29 2,606 2,889 920 931 1,071 992 1,345 1,367 
			  30-39 3,148 3,041 1,054 1,075 1,211 1,346 1,495 1,676 
			  40-49 5,725 3,804 2,015 1,562 2,546 1,763 3,076 2,530 
			  50-59 10,380 5,700 3,607 1,940 4,595 2,533 6,085 3,613 
			  60-69 15,067 7,550 5,098 2,554 7,321 3,452 10,038 4,935 
			  70-79 14,608 8,214 5,187 2,746 7,807 4,058 10,450 5,498 
			  80 and over 8,887 8,555 3,657 3,390 6,128 5,612 7,856 7,081 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2007-08 
			   West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Yorkshire  and the  Humber Strategic Health Authority England — not otherwise specified Unknown 
			   Q34 Q32 U Y 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 9 3 8 3  1 2 2 
			  10-19 613 741 628 648 60 27 115 84 
			  20-29 1,485 856 1,583 923 354 93 445 181 
			  30-39 2,710 1,033 2,725 1,344 909 138 732 184 
			  40-49 3,991 1,722 3,507 1,609 893 94 865 219 
			  50-59 3,156 1,116 2,881 1,118 545 63 496 123 
			  60-69 2,098 691 1,912 633 181 6 211 30 
			  70-79 763 266 768 253 21  66 20 
			  80 and over 242 118 231 94 50 3 110 21 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 710 712 718 755 17 19 65 57 
			  20-29 1,532 1,816 1,712 1,726 97 25 190 170 
			  30-39 1,903 2,028 1,806 1,982 124 26 217 140 
			  40-49 3,622 3,046 3,363 2,644 111 17 312 182 
			  50-59 6,769 4,239 5,900 3,597 68 10 431 210 
			  60-69 10,509 5,502 8,860 4,524 36 13 576 268 
			  70-79 10,153 5,395 8,800 5,008 24 15 524 286 
			  80 and over 6,314 5,716 5,780 5,459 20 16 356 448 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2006-07 
			   East Midlands Strategic Health Authority East  o f England Strategic Health Authority London Strategic Health Authority North East Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q33 Q35 Q36 Q30 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 9 4 9 3 12 7 3 1 
			  10-19 497 443 380 391 444 516 597 557 
			  20-29 1,247 648 877 508 1,449 734 1,494 772 
			  30-39 2,112 904 1,656 856 3,238 1,218 2,014 1,068 
			  40-49 2,822 1,301 2,357 1,193 5,004 1,751 2,842 1,376 
			  50-59 2,438 890 2,186 863 4,608 1,245 2,263 963 
			  60-69 1,490 506 1,438 573 3,054 741 1,319 432 
			  70-79 625 216 645 246 1,256 352 598 169 
			  80 and over 187 77 201 111 389 162 140 68 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 532 530 591 489 705 614 469 483 
			  20-29 1,316 1,264 1,233 1,313 2,144 2,075 1,055 998 
			  30-39 1,506 1,644 1,613 1,607 2,612 2,711 1,143 1,077 
			  40-49 2,643 2,194 3,077 2,223 4,626 3,238 2,077 1,641 
			  50-59 5,290 2,924 6,032 3,480 7,317 4,071 3,983 2,401 
			  60-69 7,394 3,648 9,258 4,386 9,321 4,655 5,458 2,881 
			  70-79 7,675 4,013 10,023 5,192 9,278 4,993 5,607 3,201 
			  80 and over 5,031 4,434 6,933 6,063 6,259 5,728 3,318 3,254 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2006-07 
			   North West Strategic Health Authority South Central Strategic Health Authority South East Coast Strategic Health Authority South West Strategic Health Authority 
			   Q31 Q38 Q37 Q39 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 14 15 4 2 3 5 4 4 
			  10-19 1,516 1,512 356 388 457 477 644 682 
			  20-29 3,135 1,689 693 425 1,007 560 1,368 747 
			  30-39 5,749 2,823 1,167 621 1,673 859 1,964 989 
			  40-49 8,178 3,812 1,646 845 2,059 1,171 3,000 1,496 
			  50-59 6,321 2,866 1,643 541 1,908 821 2,935 1,116 
			  60-69 4,038 1,284 954 351 1,259 415 2,162 681 
			  70-79 1,581 604 459 144 589 219 833 353 
			  80 and over 392 209 167 86 170 138 273 187 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 1,171 1,027 354 398 503 405 704 638 
			  20-29 2,706 2,830 865 861 1,022 954 1,369 1,346 
			  30-39 3,263 3,139 1,041 1,037 1,247 1,289 1,556 1,635 
			  40-49 5,440 3,745 1,734 1,336 2,283 1,658 2,974 2,412 
			  50-59 9,814 5,457 3,112 1,722 4,321 2,415 5,739 3,387 
			  60-69 13,479 6,962 4,131 2,070 6,370 3,102 9,308 4,458 
			  70-79 13,462 7,549 4,390 2,371 6,816 3,795 9,790 5,158 
			  80 and over 8,039 7,851 3,127 2,924 5,284 5,112 7,148 6,630 
		
	
	
		
			 Activity in English NHS Hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector —2006-07 
			   West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Yorkshire  and t he Humber Strategic Health Authority England — not otherwise specified Unknown 
			   Q34 Q32 U Y 
			   Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 
			 Wholly attributable admissions 0-9 4 11 9 3 3 1 3 2 
			  10-19 733 694 711 650 37 39 87 77 
			  20-29 1,453 688 1,528 791 296 75 408 118 
			  30-39 2,742 1,098 2,573 1,255 806 112 699 158 
			  40-49 3,958 1,602 3,330 1,477 836 86 752 136 
			  50-59 3,226 1,073 2,892 1,042 524 38 444 61 
			  60-69 1,935 608 1,587 533 147 6 184 25 
			  70-79 704 244 683 271 17 — 54 7 
			  80 and over 210 125 191 98 35 1 66 14 
			           
			 Partially attributable admissions 0-9 — — — — — — — — 
			  10-19 710 762 718 701 20 16 59 48 
			  20-29 1,668 1,799 1,680 1,696 84 28 169 154 
			  30-39 2,047 2,175 1,856 1,944 131 28 196 155 
			  40-49 3,678 2,891 3,215 2,418 105 16 200 79 
			  50-59 7,135 4,143 5,704 3,389 53 11 176 70 
			  60-69 9,927 5,004 8,032 4,132 30 5 165 81 
			  70-79 9,558 5,264 7,917 4,635 16 7 131 89 
		
	
	
		
			  80 and over 5,692 5,278 5,143 4,927 15 15 126 262 
			 Notes: 1. Alcohol-related admissions The number of alcohol-related admissions is based on the methodology developed by the North West Public Health Observatory, which uses 48 indicators for alcohol-related illnesses, determining the proportion of a wide range of diseases and injuries that can be partly attributed to alcohol as well as those that are, by definition, wholly attributable to alcohol. Further information on these proportions can be found at: www.nwph.net/nwpho/publications/AlcoholAttributableFractions.pdf The application of the NWPHO methodology has recently been updated and is now available directly from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). As such, information about episodes estimated to be alcohol related may be slightly different from previously published data. Alcohol attributable fractions are not applicable to children under 16. Therefore figures for the age groups 0 to nine and 10 to 19 relate only to wholly-attributable admissions, where the attributable fraction is one. 2. SHA/PCT of residence SHA or primary care trust (PCT) containing the patient’s normal home address. This does not necessarily reflect where the patient was treated as they may have travelled to another SHA/PCT for treatment. 3. Assessing growth through time HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, changes in activity may be due to changes in the provision of care. Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Health and Social Care Information Centre

Cancer: Drugs

Andrew Bridgen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether unspent funding in the 2011-12 cancer drugs fund budget for each strategic health authority was (a) carried over to the 2012-13 budget or (b) deducted from the amount assigned in advance for the 2012-13 budget.

Norman Lamb: The overall strategic health authority (SHA) and primary care trust (PCT) surplus reported for 2011-12 includes unspent funding allocated to the national health service for the Cancer Drugs Fund in 2011-12. As set out in the 2012-13 NHS Operating Framework, the aggregate 2011-12 SHA and PCT surplus is carried forward into 2012-13.
	The Government is committed to making £200 million available to the NHS for each of the three years of the Cancer Drugs Fund's operation and £200 million has been made available for the Cancer Drugs Fund in 2012-13. Funding for 2012-13 comprises £140 million allocated to SHAs and £60 million held by the Department for allocation in-year as required.

Care Homes: Regulation

Steve Rotheram: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many care homes were found to have committed a criminal offence of (a) failing to comply with statutory requirements or Care Quality Commission rules on staffing checks, (b) knowingly employing a person to work with adults in a care home who has been barred by the Independent Safeguarding Authority and (c) employing a person who is on the Sex Offenders' Register in each of the last five years.

Norman Lamb: The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has advised that there have been no prosecutions of care home providers in relation to regulation 21 under the Health and Social Care Act and no prosecution carried out in relation to staffing checks by the CQC between 1 April 2009 and 1 October 2010. Information on prosecutions carried out by predecessor bodies is not held.
	The Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) does not receive or maintain data in relation to offences committed under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 including offences relating to the use of a barred person for regulated activity.
	If a barred person applies for an enhanced criminal records disclosure to work with a vulnerable group they are barred from, the Criminal Records Bureau will provide this information to the ISA. Upon verification of identity, the ISA will prepare an evidence pack and forward this to the Police for appropriate action. Any decision on prosecution would be a matter for the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
	Information relating to the employment of a person on the Sex Offenders' Register is not collected centrally. The nature and severity of the sexual offence is revealed in a criminal record check and it is for care homes to act on the results of any disclosure. There is no criminal offence relating to employment unless the individual has been barred from working with certain groups. The notification requirements for registered sex offenders is separate arid provides police with an effective tool for the management of offenders within the community.

Correspondence

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average time taken was by his Department to reply to correspondence from hon. Members and Peers in the last 12 months; and for what proportion of letters the time taken to send a response was longer than (a) one month, (b) six weeks, (c) two months, (d) three months and (e) six months in that period.

Anna Soubry: The Department took an average of 12 working days to reply to correspondence received between 1 August 2011 and 31 July 2012 from hon. Members and Peers. Within that period, the following table shows the proportion of correspondence where the time taken to respond was over one month, six weeks, two months, three months and six months.
	
		
			 Time taken to respond Proportion of correspondence (%) 
			 Over one month 0.4 
			 Over six weeks 0.09 
			 Over two months 0.04 
			 Over three months 0.01 
			 Over six months 0

Diabetes

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to reduce the number of avoidable deaths caused by diabetes.

Norman Lamb: We are working with the National Diabetes Information Service and NHS Diabetes to ensure that local services have the audit data from the audit for their own areas, to see how they compare to others and focus on where improvements can be made. The Department and NHS Diabetes have a suite of tools and materials that can be used to help drive improvements and reduce avoidable deaths.
	Three documents produced over the next several months will influence the commissioning and development of diabetes services and improve outcomes for people with diabetes: the Diabetes action plan; the Long Term Conditions Outcomes strategy (to include a diabetes companion document); and the Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes strategy.

Diabetes

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to reduce the number of undetected and undiagnosed individuals with diabetes.

Norman Lamb: It is important to identify people with diabetes early to ensure that they receive prompt treatment to manage their diabetes and to help delay or prevent long-term complications of the condition.
	The Department has initiatives in place to encourage healthy eating and promote an active lifestyle that raise awareness of Type 2 diabetes. Primary care trusts are running the NHS Health Check programme, which proactively identifies and manages people at risk of vascular disease including diabetes.
	Guidelines and an accompanying algorithm were published by NHS Diabetes and the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) in 2011 to help GPs diagnose diabetes accurately for every patient.
	The National Institute of Clinical Excellence has recently published two guidance documents on the prevention of Type 2 diabetes that providers and commissioners of health services should make reference to.

Diabetes

Ian Paisley Jnr: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has for a new national diabetes strategy to replace the National Framework for Diabetes when it expires in 2013.

Norman Lamb: The last review of the National Services Framework (NSF) was published in 2010 (‘Six years on: delivering the Diabetes National Service Framework’). There have been developments in the evidence for optimal care for people with diabetes since the publication of the NSF for Diabetes in 2001 and, with this in mind, further reviews will be dependent on other influences such as the Quality Standard for Diabetes (2011).
	Three documents produced over the next several months will influence the commissioning and development of diabetes services and improve outcomes for people with diabetes: the Diabetes action plan; the Long Term Conditions Outcomes Strategy (to include a diabetes companion document); and the Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes strategy.

Diseases

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions he has had with his EU counterparts on follow-up work under Cyprus's presidency of the EU on the Danish presidency's priority of tackling non-communicable diseases, including diabetes.

Norman Lamb: We are expecting the Presidency to bring forward a set of Council Conclusions in this field, which they are aiming to agree during December's meeting of Ministers for Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer affairs (EPSCO Council ) after negotiations in Council working Groups. The Government has not yet seen a draft of the proposed Conclusions. The Cypriot presidency program gave the following details:
	"The issue of chronic diseases will be addressed by highlighting the essential role of disease prevention, early diagnosis and health promotion programmes in combination with innovative approaches in healthcare and by addressing main health determinants. In this context, the Presidency will seek to agree Council conclusions in order to emphasise healthy living throughout the lifecycle, leading to a healthy ageing process."
	There have been no official announcements from the Cyprus EU presidency that they plan to continue with highlighting diabetes.

Health Professions: English Language

Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment his Department has made of the level of English-language proficiency amongst locum doctors.

Daniel Poulter: Patient safety is paramount and all healthcare professionals working in the United Kingdom must observe the standards of professional competence, practice and ethics set by their professional regulatory body. It is the responsibility of employers to ensure that the healthcare professionals they employ are able to safely and effectively communicate with colleagues and patients.
	All non-European Economic Area healthcare professionals are required to demonstrate their knowledge of English before they are registered with the appropriate regulatory body.
	Under the European Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications it is not possible for the regulatory bodies to systematically test language competency of European Union migrants wishing to register in the UK. However, it does not preclude regulatory bodies from taking fitness to practise action against a registrant where their knowledge of English is poor.

Health Services: Reciprocal Arrangements

Gareth Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the estimated cost was of providing healthcare to residents of other EU states under the provisions of the European Health Insurance Card; and what proportion of those costs were successfully recovered from the other member states for each of the last five years.

Daniel Poulter: The amount paid to the United Kingdom for providing health care to residents of other European Economic Area countries under the provisions of the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) is shown in the following table:
	
		
			  £ 
			 2007-08 20,500,000 
			 2008-09 24,700,000 
			 2009-10 27,700,000 
			 2010-11 26,300,000 
			 2011-12 26,400,000 
		
	
	The Department recovers all costs where an EHIC has been presented by the patient and the treatment reported by the treating trust. In addition, the Department also operates formula based agreements for reimbursement with some countries. The Department does not hold data as to the number of treatments provided under the scheme that were not reported.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in (a) England, (b) London and (c) Southwark waited for more than 52 weeks for treatment after referral in each of the last six years.

Anna Soubry: The available information is shown in the following tables:
	
		
			 Number of patients that waited more than a year from referral for admitted treatment 
			  England London strategic health authority Southwark primary care trust 
			 2008-09 21,819 6,499 109 
			 2009-10 5,151 1,316 37 
			 2010-11 4,160 978 29 
			 2011-12 7,389 1,678 131 
		
	
	
		
			 Number of patients that waited more than a year from referral for non admitted treatment 
			  England London SHA Southwark PCX 
			 2008-09 53,819 9,604 346 
			 2009-10 14,993 3,571 94 
			 2010-11 11,191 2,065 76 
			 2011-12 13,045 2,767 164 
			 Note: Data are available from 2008-09. Patients who commenced treatment on admitted and non admitted pathways are shown separately. Source: Department of Health Unify2 data collection—referral to treatment waiting time statistics 
		
	
	Latest data for June 2012 shows that 85.2% of admitted patients and 98.1% of non-admitted patients in Southwark PCT started their treatment within a maximum of 18 weeks of referral. 91.6% of patients waiting to start treatment had waited less than 18 weeks.

Medical Records

Bill Esterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the arrangements for the sharing of patient medical histories between general practitioners and hospitals.

Daniel Poulter: In response to the Department's consultation on ‘Liberating the NHS: An Information Revolution’, professional groups argued for a 21(st)-century person-centred electronic health and social care system, with information recorded once at the first appropriate contact with health and care services and shared across boundaries safely. They argued for a changed national role, allowing greater local innovation and market development in information technology (IT). There was also clear consensus that national standards are needed to allow information to move freely through the health and care system and to inspire trust in that information.
	The NHS Future Forum also made a series of recommendations building on this issue—including the need for systems to support joined-up care across the whole health, care and support sector. Service providers and commissioners should ensure that information integrates around the needs of the individual. The national health service and social care services must use IT systems to share data about service users electronically. How this is achieved should be for individual health and care providers to decide, but with common standards. The key requirement is interoperability—IT systems talking to each other—including the adoption of the NHS number across health and social care.
	There is still progress to be made, as in many cases IT systems have their own 'standards' that often do not work with other systems. This is analogous to telecoms companies having their own sets of phone numbers for their network and their own SIM cards that only work with their own phones. Important information tends to be communicated on paper, often after a delay. Systems are often detached from routine professional care, which can lead to frustration and to poor recording of data.
	Properly joined-up care needs information systems that talk to each other. This approach, based on nationally set information standards, will enable information to be captured once and shared right across the health and care system. National standards and implementation guidance provide the foundation for the joining up of systems so that health, care and support can move away from solutions that work only in their area. Rather, our information will be able to follow us across organisational boundaries as people move between services, and new innovations and ideas can be taken up.
	Concerns over security and privacy issues—and a lack of clarity for professionals in understanding what level of information sharing is permitted—can lead to a culture that is overly risk averse and reluctant to share information at all, even where it would improve our care. The NHS Future Forum work has heard the clear message that:
	‘not sharing information has the potential to do more harm than sharing it’.
	There is currently an independent review of information governance, led by Dame Fiona Caldicott, that is looking at the balance between protecting people's confidentiality and enabling information to flow across the system for the benefit of patients and service users—and the wider health service. The review is expected to report next year.
	There are numerous examples of technology that are transforming care and where professionals are already championing effective information use. Simple examples include the use of secure electronic communication for sharing information between people, as well as more advanced solutions that allow systems to join up. There is a clear need to build on these and free up professionals to innovate and lead, seeing improving and using information as core elements of their job.

Medical Records

Bill Esterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will consider improving medical record sharing between general practitioners and hospitals in order to minimise the risk associated with prescriptions and treatment being offered without access to relevant medical histories.

Daniel Poulter: In May 2012, the Government published its information strategy for health and social care, ‘The power of information: putting all of us in control of the health and care information we need’
	http://informationstrategy.dh.gov.uk
	A key ambition of the Strategy is for information to be used to drive integrated care—within and between organisations, and across the health, care and support sector as a whole. This includes professionals providing care through connected information to support safer, more integrated care, for example, through online access to general practitioner (GP) records in hospitals.
	As a result of this, the professionals providing care will have more complete information. Errors or cases of lost or delayed data will be reduced, as will the need for us to repeat the same information to different professionals. In addition, sharing test results quickly in an understandable way will become an integral part of joined-up care.
	Some of the actions within the Strategy will need to be led nationally, such as setting common standards to allow information to flow effectively around the system. More detailed implementation planning will be led by organisations including the NHS Commissioning Board, the Health and Social Care Information Centre, and Public Health England.
	But many more actions will require local decisions, local leadership and local drive. Implementation will be driven at the local level, responding to local priorities and needs across health, social care and public health.
	Indeed, the case studies within this document—and in the linked case study bank available online—demonstrate local actions already being implemented to deliver parts of this broader vision.
	An example of good record sharing that is already happening between primary and secondary care is within Worcestershire Health Economy, where there is a new automated approach to support the electronic communication of clinical information seamlessly into GP clinical systems for outpatient letters and discharge summaries. This means paperwork can be completed online and shared between teams across care settings.
	The solution was developed by the acute trust and GPs working in partnership, ensuring the workload and productivity benefits are achieved by all organisations involved. The information strategy signals a move towards this type of localist approach—encouraging diversity and innovation at a local level.
	The NHS Commissioning Board will be accountable for the strategic delivery of primary care IT in the future, with funding and responsibility for GP IT being delegated to Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs).
	CCGs, as commissioners, will need to own a local informatics strategy as part of their role in driving forward transformation of services. Clinical systems and their provision are a vital part of this and important enablers in ensuring primary care quality and innovation so as to deliver joined up, safe and high quality care.

NHS: Drugs

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what protocols are in place in hospitals for accurately determining the body mass index (BMI) of patients missing several limbs where the correct drug dosage is calculated on the basis of BMI.

Daniel Poulter: The licensed dosage of medicines is not commonly determined on the basis of body mass index (BMI). Dosage is sometimes licensed on the basis of weight (for example, expressed in milligrams per kilogramme), but this would not be altered by missing limbs. However, for a small number of medicines, for example, for cancer, dosages can be based on body surface area.
	Additionally, there is some online information about dosage guidelines for people, who have had amputations. In the main, clinicians will deal with such situations on a case by case basis, making a clinical judgment about whether to change the dosage regimen and if so, by how much, according to the needs of the patient.

NHS: Drugs

Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the aims and objectives are of the Commercial Medicines Unit in respect of patented medicines in England;
	(2)  which tenders issued by the Commercial Medicines Unit and strategic health authorities included patented medicines in (a) 2009, (b) 2010 and (c) 2011;
	(3)  what the aims and objectives are of the national proprietary tender on medicines issued in December 2011.

Daniel Poulter: The aims and objectives of the Commercial Medicines Unit (CMU) in respect of patented medicines in England are:
	To deliver the procurement of branded/patented medicines by tendering for framework agreements for national health service secondary care providers, allowing aggregation of spend appropriately to achieve value for money; reduce replication; and assure a quality supply chain to the patient;
	To comply with the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended), reducing the burden on individual trusts to comply with their statutory duties in this respect; and
	To undertake procurement of patented medicines to meet the requirements of DH policy teams.
	The following two tables list tenders for patented medicines issued by the CMU in 2009, 2010 and 2011. Information about tenders issued by strategic health authorities is not held centrally.
	
		
			 Table 1: Tender Description (NHS Frameworks) 
			  Start date End date 
			 North East Proprietary Pharmaceuticals 1 July 2009 30 June 2011 
			 South London Proprietary Products Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 July 2009 30 June 2011 
			 Pan London Proprietary Products—Therapeutics 1 July 2009 30 June 2011 
			 Pan London Proprietary pharmaceuticals 1 July 2009 30 June 2010 
			 Central Proprietary 1 November 2009 31 October 2012 
			 Central Proprietary 1 November 2009 31 October 2011 
			 South East Proprietary 1 November 2009 31 October 2012 
			 South East Proprietary (Therapeutics) 1 November 2009 31 October 2012 
			 South East Proprietary 1 November 2009 31 October 2011 
			 East of England Proprietary Therapeutic Pharmaceuticals 1 November 2009 31 October 2010 
			 East of England Proprietary Therapeutic Pharmaceuticals 1 November 2009 31 October 2010 
			 East of England Proprietary Therapeutics 1 November 2009 31 October 2010 
			 East of England Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 November 2009 31 October 2011 
			 London Region (North) Proprietary North Central and East London Erythropoietic Stimulating Factors 1 January 2010 31 December 2011 
			 South West Proprietary and Therapeutic 1 March 2010 28 February 2014 
			 South West Proprietary and Therapeutic 1 March 2010 29 February 2012 
			 North West Proprietary Pharmaceuticals 1 March 2010 28 February 2011 
			 Pan London Proprietary Antiretroviral 1 April 2010 31 March 2011 
			 National Framework Agreement for Recombinant Factor viii products for use in the UK for the treatment of bleeding disorders. Wave One. 1 April 2010 31 March 2013 
		
	
	
		
			 North West London Consortium Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 June 2010 31 May 2011 
			 Pan London Proprietary Branded and Therapeutics—Branded 1 July 2010 30 June 2012 
			 Pan London Proprietary Branded and Therapeutics 1 July 2010 30 June 2012 
			 Pan London Proprietary Branded and Therapeutics—Therapeutics 1 July 2010 ,30 June 2011 
			 National Framework Agreement for Recombinant Factor viii products for use in the UK for the treatment of bleeding disorders. Wave Two. 1 July 2010 30 June 2013 
			 National Framework Agreement for products for the treatment of bleeding disorders. Wave Two (a) 1 July 2010 30 June 2013 
			 South West Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents and Homecare delivery 1 August 2010 28 February 2013 
			 East of England Proprietary Pharmaceuticals 1 November 2010 31 October 2012 
			 East of England Proprietary—Therapeutic Pharmaceuticals 1 November 2010 31 October 2012 
			 East of England Proprietary—Therapeutic Pharmaceuticals 1 November 2010 31 October 2012 
			 Central Proprietary (HIV) 1 December 2010 30 November 2011 
			 North West Proprietary 1 March 2011 28 February 2013 
			 Pan London Proprietary Antiretroviral 1 April 2011 31 March 2013 
			 Pan London Proprietary Antiretroviral 1 April 2011 31 March 2013 
			 North West London Consortium Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 June 2011 31 December 2012 
			 South London Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 July 2011 31 December 2012 
			 Pan London Proprietary Therapeutics 1 July 2011 30 June 2012 
			 North East Proprietary 1 July 2011 30 June 2015 
			 Central Proprietary GCSFs 1 September 2011 31 October 2013 
			 National Proprietary Cancer Drugs to support Cancer Drugs Fund 1 September 2011 31 August 2013 
			 East of England Proprietary Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 November 2011 31 October 2012 
			 Central Proprietary 1 November 2011 31 October 2013 
			 Central Proprietary Therapeutics 1 November 2011 31 October 2013 
			 South East Proprietary Branded 1 November 2011 31 October 2013 
			 South East Proprietary (Therapeutics) 1 November 2011 31 October 2013 
			 National Proprietary 1 December 2011 30 November 2013 
			 North Central London Consortium Proprietary and East London Erythropoietic Stimulating Agents 1 January 2012 31 December 2013 
			 South West Proprietary 1 March 2012 28 February 2014 
			 South West Proprietary and Therapeutic 1 March 2012 28 February 2014 
			 South of England (exc. London) Proprietary Antiretroviral 1 April 2012 31 March 2014 
			 National Proprietary—Treatments for Lysosomal Storage Disorders 1 May 2012 30 April 2014 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: Tender Description (DH contracts and frameworks) 
			  Start date End date 
			 Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccine 4 January 2010 31 December 2010 
			 Hib/Men C 1 January 2010 31 December 2010 
		
	
	
		
			 Low dose Diphtheria/Tetanus (Td/IPV) Vaccine 1 October 2009 30 September 2011 
			 Meningitis C Vaccine 1 January 2010 31 December 2010 
			 Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Polio and Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (DTP/IPV/HiB) Vaccine 1 April 2010 31 March 2011 
			 Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine (MMR) 1 April 2011 31 March 2012 
			 DTaP/IPV Pre-school vaccine 1 April 2010 31 March 2011 
			 Low dose Diphtheria Tetanus and Inactivated Polio Vaccine (Td/IPV) to NHS Hospitals in England 1 July 2010 30 June 2012 
			 DTAP/IPV vaccine 1 April 2012 31 March 2013 
			 Haemophilus influenza type B, Meningitis C single combined vaccine (HiB/Men C) 1 January 2012 31 December 2012 
			 Meningitis C Vaccine 1 January 2012 31 December 2012 
			 Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Polio and Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (DTP/IPV/HiB) Vaccine 1 April 2012 31 March 2013 
			 Low dose diphtheria tetanus and inactivated polio vaccine (Td/IPV). 1 October 2012 01 September 2013 
			 Human Papillomavirus Vaccine 1 July 2012 30 June 2015 
			 Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccine 1 January 2012 31 December 2013 
			 Advanced Purchase Agreement for the Supply of Pandemic Specific Vaccine 1 June2012 31 May 2016 
			 CBRN Countermeasures (1)— (1)— 
			 Various Medicinal Products (1)— (1)— 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 September 2009 31 August 2011 
			 CBRN Countermeasures (1)— (1)— 
			 Oseltamivir Suspension 26 April 2010 25 April 2012 
			 Anti-infectives and medicines for the emergency treatment of poisonings framework agreement 1 April 2011 31 March 2013 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 January 2011 31 March 2013 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 April 2011 31 March 2013 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 April 2012 31 March 2014 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 June 2009 31 May 2011 
			 CBRN Countermeasures 1 June 2009 31 March 2014 
			 (1) One off purchase. 
		
	
	With respect to the national proprietary tender on medicines, in December 2011 the CMU adopted a national tendering (once only) model for those branded medicines lines characterised by relatively simple and similar pricing arrangements across all the English regions. This was introduced to manage the CMU's regional branded/patented medicines programme more efficiently; to reduce the administrative workload for the bidding suppliers, the CMU and the English NHS Trusts. More complex and variably priced branded/patented medicines remain on the previous CMU regional level tendering programme.

NHS: Internet

Karen Lumley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to utilise the internet as a means of providing better quality health services.

Anna Soubry: The Government's information strategy for health and social care in England provides the clear case for change, the ambition and next steps for information and information technology across health and care to drive more joined up, safer, better care for everyone.
	The strategy, ‘The power of information’ which was published on 21 May 2012, sets out a 'digital first' approach—adopting digital methods to deliver health care—but makes clear that face-to-face contact with our health and care professionals will remain an essential, core part of our care. Where there are high quality, low cost alternatives to face-to-face contact with our health and care professionals then, increasingly, we should have the choice to use them.
	Over time; the use of digital and online technologies will simplify services for most of us, and will enable care professionals to focus more time on face-to-face care when it is really needed, reaching out to those who have the greatest need for support.
	As one example of specific action, by 2015, all general practices will be expected to make available electronic booking and cancelling of appointments, ordering of repeat prescriptions, communication with the practice and access to records to anyone registered with the practice that requests these services.
	A small number of actions will need to be led nationally, such as setting common standards to allow information to flow effectively around the system. More detailed implementation planning will be led by organisations including the NHS Commissioning Board, the Health and Social Care Information Centre, and Public Health England.
	But many more actions will require local decisions, local leadership and local drive. Implementation will be driven at the local level, responding to local priorities and needs across health, social care and public health. Indeed, the case studies within this document—and in the linked case study bank available online—demonstrate .local actions already being implemented to deliver parts of this broader vision.
	The information strategy is available online at:
	http://informationstrategy.dh.gov.uk/
	The strategy has already been placed in the Library.

NHS: Pay

Julian Sturdy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to publish his Department's report on NHS regional pay.

Anna Soubry: The Government has received pre-publication copies of the NHS and Senior Salaries Pay Review Body reports on market facing pay. We are considering the recommendations and will publish the reports in due course.

NHS: Telephone Services

Stephen McPartland: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of (a) the number of NHS helplines which use 08 telephone numbers, (b) the number of calls made to such helplines in the latest period for which figures are available and (c) the total cost to consumers of such calls.

Anna Soubry: The Department has made no assessment of the number of NHS helplines that use 084 numbers, other than NHS Direct which is still accessible through 0845 4647 until the new, free-to-call, NHS 111 service is fully rolled-out. Such information as is available is in the following table:
	
		
			 Calls to NHS Direct 
			  Number of calls (thousand) 
			 2003-04 5,244 
			 2004-05 5,369 
			 2005-06 5,522 
			 2006-07 5,018 
			 2007-08 4,855 
			 2008-09 5,051 
			 2009-10 4,920 
			 2010-11 4,699 
			 2011-12 4,393 
			 Source: Unpublished but validated data 
		
	
	This information refers solely to calls to NHS Direct's 0845 4647 service. Data are not available prior to 2003-04 as NHS Direct was not a national organisation at the time.
	Calls to NHS Direct cost a maximum of 5p per minute from a BT landline. Mobiles and other Networks may vary.

Nutrition

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much his Department has spent on its Supermeals campaign since the inception of the campaign; how it is measuring the results of the campaign; and whether it plans to continue with the campaign.

Daniel Poulter: This year's Supermeals campaign was part of the ongoing Change4Life programme aimed at encouraging and supporting people to make small but significant lifestyle changes to improve their health. People sometimes think eating healthier is more expensive and difficult, but with time and experience, people who plan their shopping and their meals are more likely to make healthier choices.
	The campaign offered discounts on healthy ingredients, such as fruit and vegetables and low fat yoghurts, at more than 1,000 Asda, Co-operative Food and Aldi stores across England.
	4 million recipe packs with quick healthy meal ideas was distributed to Change4Life supporters and an online recipe finder helped families plan their meals.
	100,000 free copies of a brand new cookbook with celebrity chef Ainsley Harriott were also made available. It contained a month's worth of popular, healthy recipes for under £5 to help families make the most of the offers available at their local stores.
	YouTube cooking tutorials with Ainsley Harriott were also made available on the Change4Life website.
	The campaign costs (ex VAT) were as follows:
	Design and printing 4.07 million recipe packs—£213,000
	Development of YouTube videos (includes production costs for venue, logistics, filming, editing and other expenses in orchestrating the footage)—£22,000
	National press advertising—£354,732
	Online digital advertising—£175,000
	A full evaluation of the campaign has been completed and will be published in line with the Department's freedom of information publication scheme.
	Promoting healthy lifestyles, particularly from a young age is a priority for the Government. To continue to encourage healthy eating we shall build on the inspiration of the Olympics and Paralympics through active efforts to improve the health and wellbeing of people of all ages.

Strokes

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate his Department has made of the critical mass of patients required for a hyper-acute stroke unit capable of delivering the patient outcomes identified in the National Stroke Strategy.

Anna Soubry: Hyper-acute stroke units (HASUs) should be located where patients can gain timely access to high quality expertise in diagnosing, treating and managing strokes. The National Stroke Strategy described a service as one where there is 24 hour, seven day week access to a stroke triage system, expert clinical assessment, timely imaging and intravenous thrombolysis, where appropriate.
	Neither the Stroke Strategy or the NICE Quality Standard prescribes the critical mass of patients needed for a viable, high quality HASU. However, there is currently a review of stroke services in the Midlands and East strategic health authority cluster and, within its service specification for hyper-acute stroke care, it states that at least 600 stroke patient admissions are typically required to provide sufficient patient load to make a HASU clinically sustainable.
	Patient volume is just one element of a range of characteristics that define a quality acute service. Others include availability of specialist staff at all hours, continuous access to imaging and other diagnostic facilities; pre-hospital travel times and clinical and financial sustainability.

Surgery: Coventry

Bob Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many surgical operations were carried out by the NHS in Coventry in each of the last five years.

Anna Soubry: The information is not available in the format requested.
	The number of finished consultant episodes where there was a main procedure or intervention (OPCS codes A00-O10 and O15-X97) recorded with university hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire national health service trust as the main provider from 2006-07 to 2010-11 is shown in the following table. It is not possible to identify ‘surgery’ using OPSC4 codes and so the data provided includes treatments such as injections, radiotherapy and endoscopy.
	
		
			 Count of finished consultant episodes (1)  where there was a main procedure or intervention (2)  (OPCS codes A01-O10 and O15-X97) recorded with university hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS trust as the main provider (3)  from 2006-07 to 2010-11 
			  Finished consultant episodes (FCEs) 
			 2010-11 97,071 
			 2009-10 96,520 
			 2008-09 91,390 
			 2007-08 69,728 
			 2006-07 59,682 
			 (1) Finished Consultant Episode A finished consultant episode (FCE) is a continuous period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. FCEs are counted against the year in which they end. Figures do not represent the number of different patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the same stay in hospital or in different stays in the same year. (2) Main procedure or intervention The first recorded procedure or intervention in each episode; usually the most resource intensive procedure or intervention performed during the episode. It is appropriate to use main procedure when looking at admission details, (e.g. time waited), but a more complete count of episodes with a particular procedure is obtained by looking at the main and the secondary procedures. The data provided is for OPCS4 procedures; A01-O10 and O15-X97. O11 to O14 and Z Chapter codes have not been included as these would only be recorded for a secondary procedure or intervention. Where a procedure or intervention is recorded there must always be a main procedure or intervention. (3) Hospital Provider A provider code is a unique code that identifies an organisation acting as a health care provider (e.g. NHS Trust or PCT). Hospital providers can also include Treatment Centres (TC). Normally, if data is tabulated by health care provider, the figure for an NHS trust gives the activity of all the sites as one aggregated figure. However, in the case of those with embedded treatment centres, this data is quoted separately. In these cases, '-X' is appended to the code for the rest of the trust, to remind users that the figures are for all sites of the trust excluding the treatment centres. The quality of TC returns are such that data may not be complete. Some NHS trusts have not registered their TC as a separate site, and it is therefore not possible to identify their activity separately. Data from some independent sector providers, where the onus for arrangement of dataflows is on the commissioner, may be missing. Care must be taken when using this data as the counts may be lower than true figures. Data quality: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and primary care trusts (PCTs) in England and from some independent sector organisations for activity commissioned by the English NHS. The NHS Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies. While this brings about improvement over time, some shortcomings remain. Assessing growth through time (In-patients): HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, changes in activity may be due to changes in the provision of care. Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Health and Social Care Information Centre

Swine Flu

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the proportion of deaths avoided by the use of (a) influenza vaccines and (b) anti-virals in the last 40 months;
	(2)  what his most recent assessment is of the efficacy of the influenza A subtype H1N1 vaccine (a) as a prophylactic and (b) in reducing the symptoms of swine flu;
	(3)  what evidence his Department has evaluated on possible adverse side effects from the use of influenza A subtype H1N1 (a) vaccines and (b) anti-virals in the last 40 months.

Daniel Poulter: No assessment has been made of the proportion of deaths avoided in the last 40 months from use of influenza vaccines and/or antivirals. However, the scientific evidence base underpinning both antiviral and pandemic vaccination was completed in June 2010. The reviews took into account studies completed prior to and after swine flu.
	The antiviral review found that:
	For healthy adults there is strong statistical evidence from clinical trials involving seasonal influenza that zanamivir and oseltamivir, given within 48 hours of symptom onset for clinically-diagnosed "Influenza-Like Illness" reduces the time to symptom alleviation by roughly half of one day.
	In addition, the likelihood of requiring antibiotics is reduced by 60% if antivirals are given within 48 hours on the appearance of symptoms.
	The vaccines review drew conclusions from the available studies which will be taken into account in future pandemic vaccination strategies and also summarised the key issues and challenges.
	Both reviews are available online at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_125318
	The most recent published estimates from United Kingdom countries produced by the Health Protection Agency and others of the effectiveness of influenza vaccination to prevent confirmed influenza A(H1N1) 2009 infection suggest that:
	monovalent pandemic influenza A(H1N1) 2009 vaccination during the 2009-10 influenza pandemic was 72% effective, published article at:
	http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21251487
	and
	trivalent seasonal influenza vaccination during the 2010-11 influenza season was 56% (95% confidence interval 42% to 66%) effective, published article at:
	www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22691710
	The same article also highlights the additional residual protection provided by monovalent pandemic influenza A(H1N1) 2009 vaccination given during the 2009-10 pandemic in the 2010-11 influenza season.
	There are no similar published estimates from UK countries of the effectiveness of influenza-vaccination to reduce the symptoms of influenza A(H1N1) 2009 infection, although a study in Scotland suggested that monovalent pandemic influenza A(H1N1) 2009 vaccination was 19.5% (95% confidence interval 0.8% to 34.7%) effective at preventing emergency hospital admissions from influenza-related disorders during the 2009-10 pandemic, published article at:
	www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22738894
	During the 2009-210 H1N1 pandemic, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) undertook a proactive safety monitoring strategy for the swine influenza vaccines and antivirals used in the UK. As part of this, the MHRA established a dedicated reporting system, an adjunct to the existing Yellow Card Scheme, for suspected side effects to the vaccines and antivirals. The strategy involved daily analysis of all suspected side effect reports, a real-time statistical analysis of the data and weekly publication of its ongoing review on the MHRA website. As well as such data arising from the UK reporting scheme, the MHRA was fully involved in evaluating other sources of safety data from across Europe.
	Following the swine flu pandemic, the MHRA undertook a cumulative safety review of the swine flu vaccines and antiviral medicines including suspected adverse reaction (ADR) reports received through the dedicated swine influenza ADR webportal and conducting analyses to determine whether the number of reports of adverse events of interest were received more frequently than would be expected in this population. Advice from the Commission on Human Medicines was that the vast majority of reported reactions to the pandemic vaccines and antivirals were consistent with the recognised side effects of these products or conditions associated with influenza itself.
	Since the time of the post-pandemic review the MHRA has been closely monitoring all data sources including spontaneous ADR reports from the UK and other countries worldwide in addition to published studies relating to swine flu vaccines and antivirals. Swine influenza vaccines, including Pandemrix are no longer being used to vaccinate against H1N1 influenza.
	As with all medicines and vaccines on the UK market, the MHRA will keep the safety of swine flu vaccines and antivirals under close review.

Swine Flu

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the cost was of destruction of the doses of influenza A subtype H1N1 vaccine purchased by the Government but not used;
	(2)  how many doses of influenza A subtype H1N1 vaccine purchased by the Government but not used (a) remain viable, (b) were destroyed and (c) were redistributed;
	(3)  how many doses of influenza A subtype H1N1 vaccine were (a) successfully cancelled prior to delivery and (b) received but not used in the last 40 months;
	(4)  what proportion of those diagnosed with influenza A subtype H1N1 received Tamiflu in the last 40 months;
	(5)  what the total gross cost to the public purse was of purchasing influenza A subtype HIN1 (a) vaccines and (b) anti-viral drugs over the last 40 months.

Daniel Poulter: In the swine flu pandemic there were two suppliers of H1N1 vaccine. 32 million doses were ordered from Baxter and 90 million were ordered from GSK in June 2009. With Baxter, we utilised a break clause in our contract and cancelled remaining orders on 28 February 2010.
	As the Department did not have a break clause with GSK, in line with their agreements with other countries, we entered into more detailed negotiations with a view to reaching a settlement that would be in the interests of both parties This settlement, reached in April 2010, resulted in savings of around a third of the original value of the total orders with GSK. It involved the Department taking total deliveries of 34,838,500 doses of Pandemrix, including vaccine received up to the point of the agreement, the purchase of approx 16 million doses of H5N1 "bird flu" vaccine and courses of the antiviral Relenza to replace stock used in the pandemic.
	H1N1 vaccine is no longer manufactured and, beyond the orders placed during the swine flu, no further orders have been placed.
	H1N1 vaccine is no longer used as it has reached the end of its licensed shelf life. Centrally held stock, amounting to approx 20 million doses was destroyed. Subsequently, in England, unused stock of pandemic specific vaccine held centrally was disposed of by incineration. The cost of incineration was estimated at £115,000. Local national health service bodies will have been responsible for the disposal of stock held locally and details of local disposal costs are not held centrally.
	3.8 million doses of vaccine were donated to the World Health Organisation at the time of the swine flu pandemic.
	In the 2009 H1N1 pandemic over 2.7 million assessments were completed through the National Pandemic Flu Service which resulted in the distribution of 1.1 million antiviral medicines to symptomatic patients who contacted the NPFS and satisfied the eligibility criteria for access to antiviral medicines in England. In subsequent winters, the National Pandemic Flu Service was not used and antiviral medicines were prescribed and dispensed in the community in the normal way. The following amount of antiviral medicines were prescribed and then dispensed in the community (data on antivirals used in hospitals is not collected).
	
		
			 Time period Oseltamivir Phosphate—Tamiflu Zanamivir — Relenza 
			 2010-11 38,798 1,359 
			 2011-12 2,477 77 
			 2012-13 (Quarter 1) 851 8 
			 Source: ePACT data (England only) 
		
	
	The Department has released the “high level pricing information” on pandemic flu vaccine spend up to the end of the vaccine deliveries in April 2010. The sum of payments to GSK and Baxter for all H1N1 vaccine received up to the point that all deliveries ceased was £239 million.
	The total amount spent on antivirals is still considered commercial in confidence. However, specific arrangements are in place with Roche to ensure that Tamiflu returned shortly before it reaches the end of its shelf life can be replaced at a reduced price. Discussions are also taking place with GSK on a suitable shelf life extension programme for Relenza.

Telemedicine

Nigel Adams: To ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to his Department's whole system demonstrator extended field trial for telecare, what estimate he has made of the likely (a) cost savings from wider adoption of telecare, (b) capital saving by requiring fewer hospital beds and (c) savings in hospital running costs.

Norman Lamb: The Whole System Demonstrator (WSD) programme is the largest randomised control trial of telehealth and telecare anywhere in the world, involving 6,191 patients and 238 GP practices across three sites, Newham, Kent and Cornwall. The telehealth part of the trial focused on three conditions, diabetes, COPD and coronary heart disease.
	Evaluation of the telecare data is ongoing with peer review of the findings the next step. The WSD telehealth results were formally published in the BMJ on the 22 June 2012—‘Effect of telehealth on use of secondary care and mortality: findings from the Whole System Demonstrator cluster randomised trial’:
	www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e3874
	Department of Health modelling suggests there is the potential for £1.2 billion efficiency savings over the next five years if the numbers using telehealth increase to around 3 million. Estimates of impact will be refined in the coming months as the WSD research team report further findings on telecare, benefits for carers, and more on the benefits for patients with the specific diseases in the study.
	WSD clearly shows that using telehealth as an integral part of health and care services can help to reduce hospital admissions. The 3 million lives initiative is the Department's response to this very strong evidence which, with industry and national health service/social care partners, will drive the improvements in services, care and cost that are possible.